Hailing the Philippines as a Pioneer in Children’s Participation, Experts of the Committee on the Rights of the Child Also Ask about Levels of Violence in the Country
The Committee on the Rights of the Child today concluded its consideration of the fifth and sixth combined periodic report of the Philippines under the Convention of the Rights of the Child. Committee Experts commended the State as a pioneer in child participation, and also asked about the high levels of violence to which children were exposed, particularly in the war on drugs.
Committee Experts said the Philippines was a pioneer when it came to children’s participation, which was very positive. What was being done to ensure that children were truly involved in all matters relating to them? Could more information be provided on child participation when it came to addressing climate change? Committee Experts also noted that violence against children was a big issue, with over 80 per cent of children being exposed to violence in the home and elsewhere. The review of the plan to combat violence against children showed that violence had increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. What else did the review show? What measures had been taken to provide support and psychological assistance to orphaned children? What measures had been taken to protect the victims and child witnesses of violence, particularly in the war on drugs?
Introducing the report, Angelo M. Tapales, Executive Director, Council for the Welfare of Children and head of the delegation, said three nationwide children's consultations had been conducted in 2022. The Guidebook on Child Participation in the Philippines was enhanced and used to standardise the conduct of those consultations. Furthermore, the 2017-2022 National Strategic Plan on Child Participation in the Philippines had been developed to strengthen the promotion of child participation in the family, community, school, media, and other institutions. The Magna Carta of Children, a comprehensive children’s human rights law, was envisioned to be enacted in 2025, and would usher in the creation of the Philippine Commission on Children and the Child Ombudsman. In the administration of juvenile justice, several policies were formulated and adopted, including a Protocol and Process flow chart for handling children involved in dangerous drugs. The Philippines was pleased to present milestones and share best practices in the dialogue and looked forward to the Committee’s constructive observations and recommendations.
In closing remarks, Clarence Nelson, Committee Expert and Taskforce Coordinator for the Philippines, thanked the delegation for the frank exchange of information and ideas. The Committee was happy that the State was making progress in its legislation and hoped that would continue.
Mr. Tapales said the Philippines had come a long way regarding children’s rights protection, but knew that more could be done. The observations of the Committee regarding the issues facing the children in the country would all be taken to heart, and the Government would take all necessary steps to address those concerns.
The delegation of the Philippines consisted of representatives from the Council for the Welfare of Children; the Presidential Human Rights Committee Secretariat; the Philippine Commission on Women; the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council; the Regional Trial Court Branch, The Court of Appeals; the Department of Social Welfare and Development; the Department of Justice; the Department of Health; the Department of Foreign Affairs; the Office of the Court Administrator; the Philippine National Police; the Presidential Human Rights Commission Secretariat; and the Permanent Mission of the Philippines to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue the concluding observations on the report of Viet Nam at the end of its ninety-first session on 23 September. Those, and other documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, will be available on the session’s webpage.
Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here. The programme of work of the Committee’s ninety-first session and other documents related to the session can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public at 3 p.m. this afternoon to consider the combined third to sixth periodic report of Kuwait (CRC/C/KWT/3-6) .
Report
The Committee has before it the combined fifth and sixth periodic reports of the Philippines (CRC/C/PHL/5-6) .
Presentation of Report
ANGELO M. TAPALES, Executive Director, Council for the Welfare of Children and head of the delegation, greeted the Committee on behalf of the 44 million Filipino children. Innovative mechanisms had been established to mitigate the adverse impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on children. Those included the activated hotline numbers and online complaint desks for reporting and responding to incidents of violence against children, and the first long-term Basic Education Development Plan 2030. Laws enacted at the height of the pandemic included a law prohibiting online sexual abuse or exploitation of children, and the proliferation of exploitation materials; the law prohibiting child marriage in the Philippines; and the expanded anti-Trafficking in Persons Act, among others. Those new laws enhanced the 29 child-rights protection laws enacted during the period of reporting.
Three nationwide children's consultations had been conducted in 2022. The Guidebook on Child Participation in the Philippines was enhanced and used to standardise the conduct of those consultations. Furthermore, the 2017-2022 National Strategic Plan on Child Participation in the Philippines had been developed to strengthen the promotion of child participation in the family, community, school, media, and other institutions. The Magna Carta of Children, a comprehensive children’s human rights law, was envisioned to be enacted in 2025, and would usher in the creation of the Philippine Commission on Children and the Child Ombudsman.
Mr. Tapales said that the State rendered Government services more inclusive and gender-responsive through several facets, including by strengthening the system for prevention, early identification, referral and intervention in developmental delays and disabilities in early childhood. In 2017, a gender-responsive education policy had been developed, to protect children from discrimination, among other goals. The Government had also rolled out a “budget tagging system” for children, which determined the budget allocation of local government units dedicated to programmes for children. At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government also addressed issues regarding children’s health and child abuse through the development of the “Health, Nutrition and Child Protection Referral Pathway,” which provided a basic guide on the flow of reporting and referral of cases of child abuse and health concerns during the pandemic.
In the administration of juvenile justice, the State had established a Comprehensive National Juvenile Intervention Programme, which served as a roadmap to ensure the full implementation of the juvenile justice and welfare law. Several policies were formulated and adopted, including a Protocol and Process flow chart for handling children involved in dangerous drugs. The judiciary also introduced innovations to render courts more child-friendly, to protect children from trauma when providing testimonies. Judges and court personnel, as well as prosecutors, public defenders, and law enforcement officers undertook continuous child and gender-sensitivity training by the Philippine Judicial Academy.
The Philippines’ continuing advocacy on child rights protection was translated into policies and programmes pursued under the Philippine Human Rights Plan. The plan directed the implementation of child responsive programmes; a legislative agenda on children’s participation and welfare; an effective mechanism for inter-agency coordination; and a functional monitoring, evaluation, and reporting system. The Philippines was pleased to present milestones and share best practices in the dialogue and looked forward to the Committee’s constructive observations and recommendations.
Questions by Committee Experts
CLARENCE NELSON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Coordinator for the Philippines, said the Committee was pleased to hear about progress made in passing legislation, especially regarding child marriage and online abuse. The report discussed 29 laws in total; what measures were being taken to implement those laws? Was the anti-corporal punishment bill going to be resubmitted to Parliament? Could the delegation comment on the intent to reduce the age of criminal responsibility? Why was there a differentiation between the punishment for the rape of girls and the rape of boys? Would a new national action plan be drawn up at the expiration of the current one this year? How transparent were the accountability and spending processes of the Government? General corruption was a matter of concern; what happened to the Anti-Corruption Commission? Were there other anti-corruption measures used to combat that problem? The Committee welcomed efforts the Philippines had made to improve its data collection system. Did the Government have access to disaggregated data? What measures were taken to combat the drop in reporting which had occurred after the COVID-19 pandemic?
Violence against children was a big issue, with over 80 per cent of children being exposed to violence in the home and elsewhere. The review of the plan to combat violence against children showed that violence had increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. What else did the review show? The plan did not address areas including online violence; could the delegation comment on that? When would the plan be rolled out on a national basis? There was a low reporting rate for violence in the Philippines, including for sexual violence and abuse. What was being done about that? Why were low-level cases being actively pursued within the courts? Had a national preventative mechanism against torture been established, and were there any special processes for addressing child victims? Were helplines available throughout the Philippines?
HYND AYOUBI IDRISSI, Committee Vice Chair and Taskforce Member, said Filipino legislation aligned the definition of the child with the provisions of the Convention. Could the delegation inform the Committee on specific measures to ensure the law on child marriage was effectively implemented across the country? Marginalised groups faced substantial discrimination across the country. What measures were planned to combat de facto discrimination? What had been undertaken by the State party to train those working with and for children, to ensure the best interests of the child were a fundamental principle? The Committee was alarmed about the murders of children, the use of children for military purposes, and extra-judicial executions. The war on drugs had seen many children killed, or left traumatised, abandoned, or orphaned. What was being planned to prosecute all those involved in those executions? What measures had been taken to provide support and psychological assistance to orphaned children? What measures had been taken to protect the victims and child witnesses of violence, particularly in the war on drugs? The Philippines was a pioneer when it came to children’s participation, which was very positive. What was being done to ensure that children were truly involved in all matters relating to them?
The Committee hailed the Philippines for efforts in guaranteeing birth registration, particularly within populations of concern. The Committee also welcomed the Philippines’ accession in 2022 to the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. However, there was a large proportion of children who had not been registered and were at risk of statelessness; in 2021, over 128,000 children were at risk of being stateless. What measures had been taken to continue efforts toward birth registration? What had been done to protect those children from statelessness?
BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, asked to what extent the socio-economic agenda targeted children? What were the criteria for accessing benefits and what was their impact? The number of Filipinos working overseas resulted in over 3 million children being left behind; could the delegation comment on that? Could information be provided on the regulatory framework for institutions? What efforts had been made towards de-institutionalisation? How had the Foster Care Act of 2012 been implemented? Could the delegation clarify the term “foundlings” used in the report? What was the balance between international adoption and domestic adoption?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said the law on “foundlings” specifically defined a foundling as an abandoned child or infant with unknown parentage. By Filipino law, that was someone under the age of 18. It was a priority for the Philippines to implement measures to address the root causes of the rising number of adolescent pregnancies. The Government was undertaking several activities to address that issue, including the promotion of quality sexuality education, access to reproductive health services and protective services against violence and abuse. A registry was available which listed all persons with disabilities, including children. Children with physical disability accounted for the highest percentage of children with disabilities in the country. Benefit packages were in place for children with disabilities.
There had been an increase in the number of convictions for trafficking cases, and 600 child victims had secured justice against their traffickers. A taskforce had been created against trafficking, an offence which the Philippines was committed to addressing. There were existing mechanisms to investigate corruption in the Philippines, including the Ombudsman and an office within the President’s Office tasked with investigating corruption. An inter-agency committee had been created to investigate cases of judicial killings. Since 2019, there had been efforts made to use video interviews, to avoid re-traumatising victims. A hotline was available for people to report cases of trafficking in persons. The hotline was available 24/7 throughout the Philippines. Reports could also be made through e-mail and Facebook.
The delegation said that no bill or law had ever been approved to lower the age of criminal responsibility in the Philippines. The funding of rehabilitation facilities went through strict processes for qualifying the beneficiaries.
The Philippines was implementing conditional cash transfers, benefitting over 2 million children. The programme included family development sessions, which discussed the prevention of child abuse, as well as youth development sessions. The de-institutionalisation of each child was planned when he or she entered an institution, to ensure their families would be prepared for their reintegration into society. Through family development sessions, the Government partnered with the local civil register for the registration of children, particularly for children living in indigenous communities. Any abandoned children would be cared for by the State; being placed in institutions was a last resort and a family environment was always preferred. There were case workers appointed to oversee the needs of every child who was abandoned.
The Philippines law enforcement agency fostered collaboration with other international agencies when it came to the prosecution of online abuse of children. This had resulted in 71 convictions and the rescue of 666 minor victims, from 2016 to present. Out of the 71 convictions, 10 were foreign nationals. Video evidence was used to prevent the re-traumatisation of the child victim.
When it came to incarcerated mothers, a policy was in place which ensured that children were not separated from their mothers before they were six months old. The infant and the mother would also be given protection within the facility. Before a child was separated from his or her mother, it was ensured that they were given sufficient time to bond. From 2016–2019, the Child Rights Center of the Commission on Human Rights had conducted a series of research studies and youth home visits. It received complaints and queries and released press statements on child rights issues and reports. Since July 2019, four bills had been filed and were pending in Congress. The draft Charter of the Commission on Human Rights had undergone consultation with stakeholders, and its passage would be advocated for in Congress. Students were allowed to attend schools wearing clothes which expressed their gender identity.
Questions by Committee Experts
CLARENCE NELSON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Coordinator for the Philippines, asked about the helplines; were these used for reports of sexual abuse or domestic violence against children? Were they staffed by professionally competent people?
HYND AYOUBI IDRISSI, Committee Vice Chair and Taskforce Member, said lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender, and intersex children faced discrimination in schools on a daily basis. What measures were in place to allow them to report that in a confidential manner without fear of reprisals from other children?
CLARENCE NELSON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Coordinator for the Philippines, asked if there had been a mid-term review of the national strategic plan for children with disabilities? How was disability defined? Were families with children with disabilities supported by the State? Were there specialised paediatricians for children with disabilities? Reports had been received regarding cases of sexual violence against deaf girls and those who were visually impaired, which were not properly investigated due to the absence of sign language interpreters. What was the State’s position regarding sign language interpreters generally? What happened when these individuals went to the police about such instances?
BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, asked about progress made on child mortality since 2016; what interventions had helped to reduce numbers? The State should be congratulated on the “Mandatory Children and Infants Immunization Act.” What was the impact of that act? What were some of the challenges faced in reaching every child? The reproductive health of adolescents was one of the issues which needed to be highlighted. What was the status of the State party regarding safe abortion? What had the State party done as a measure to address the challenges identified in regard to HIV/AIDS? Was there discussion in the State party around developing a comprehensive child mental health policy?
ANN MARIE SKELTON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, said education was an area where the Philippines had done a commendable amount of work, however there was still a dropout rate which needed to be lowered. What was being done to close those gaps? What was being done to include marginalised children such as those in street situations? What was being done to address the lack of educational resources in rural areas? Why was there a problem in those areas? Could more information be provided about the supplementary feeding programme to increase enrolment in early childhood education? What else was been done to increase enrolment, particularly in rural areas? What ideas had been developed to create more spaces to play for children?
How did the Philippines deal with asylum seeking, refugee and migrant children? How were these children received and cared for? How was age uncertainty of these children dealt with? The Committee noted that certain types of child labour were banned. What measures were taken to reintegrate children back into school, or what was done if they had never been in school? What was being done to communicate to children and families that the short-term gains of child labour did not pan out in the long term? Was the work of labour inspectors effective in the informal sector? The figures on children in street situations were confusing. What was the true situation of street children in the country?
The Philippines was to be commended for adopting several anti-trafficking acts, however it remained prevalent. Was a new strategic action plan being developed? What had been learnt from the previous period? There were areas where the sale of children was occurring to pay off debts; what was being done about that? Ms. Skelton commended the Philippines for adopting measures for the special protection of children in armed conflict, however children were still at risk. Was the State considering joining the Third Optional Protocol?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that a law had been drafted to minimise online sexual abuse and exploitation. The Government was optimistic that would make a difference; the enactment of the law cast a wider net, enabling more perpetrators to be brought to justice. Under the amended law on trafficking, there were support services for victims and their families. The law mandating stronger convictions against rape and sexual abuse had also raised the age of sexual consent to 16 years of age. The Philippine Commission on Children would operationally replace the Council for the Welfare of Children and would be attached to the Office to the President, serving as the primary convener for all bodies working on children’s rights. The passing of the “Magna Carta” on children would create the Commission. The Philippines published budget documents regularly and was strengthening children’s participation in Governmental processes through a series of consultations. The Council for the Welfare of Children was developing a statistical and monitoring framework which would serve as a database for children and would establish a 24-hour hotline to address children’s concerns.
Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government had developed training manuals to support services related to HIV, child protection, mental health, and other issues. The Philippines was creating a plan of action to end violence against children. The Council for the Welfare of Children in 2020 began conducting coaching and mentoring with local Government units on the plan to end violence against children. A gender-responsive policy was issued in 2017 to protect children from all forms of discrimination. The policy covered indigenous children, lesbian, gay, transgender children, and those in conflict with the law. Children’s participation was being honoured in the Philippines, and a 2021 guidebook on that topic had been created. There was a child representative on the Council for the Welfare of Children and on regional and subcommittees for the Council.
There were more than 60 hotlines operating in the Philippines to protect women and children against violence. All staff were specially trained to work with cases featuring violence, abuse, and exploitation. A national strategic plan for children with disabilities aimed to enable an environment where those children could fully enjoy their rights and reach their full potential. There had been no mid-term reviews conducted as such, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, a review would be conducted one year prior to the plan’s culmination. There was a downward trend of child labour in the Philippines, with the number of children participating in child labour halved from 2007 to 2020. The Government took strategic measures to eliminate child labour, including through providing livelihood assistance to parents of children who were participating in child labour.
The number 4,000 was not the total number of children in street situations; it was the total number of street children served by the Philippines Department of Social Welfare and Development Programme. In 2022, there were more than 246,000 street children in the country. Efforts were being made to manage those numbers and rescue the children and integrate them back into society. Under the revised penal code in the Philippines, abortion was prohibited and penalised. However, jurisprudence dating from 1961 stated that in the case of a medical necessity, abortion could be performed.
The delegation said that a process was in place to ensure that learners with disabilities were identified, and to facilitate their inclusion in the education system. Various programmes were in place to discourage students from dropping out of school. The alternative learning system and alternative delivery modes were flexible learning options which were helpful for learners at risk of dropping out, and those with special needs. When the Philippines ratified the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, it made a commitment that the minimum age of recruitment to the armed forces was 18 years.
The delegation said the Government did not “red-tag” anyone (meaning to mark individuals with accusations) particularly children who had been recruited, and who were innocent victims. Parents had learned that children in certain schools were being forced to use weapons and that their children’s academic records were unavailable. The institutions were not schools for children, but training for combatants. The Government had no choice but to close those schools, in line with its commitments under the Optional Protocol. Until such time that the third Optional Protocol on a communications procedure was shielded from abuse, the Philippines was not inclined to ratify it.
A 24/7 hotline had been established to address cases of violence against women and children, and social media accounts had been set up to receive complaints. The Philippines had established a centre targeting online exploitation of children; it was able to obtain information from other countries and Interpol, as well as through local sources. It was the first centre in Southeast Asia where local and international authorities gathered to aid such investigations. Many federal law enforcement officials including from the Netherlands and Australia were able to refer cases to the centre. In 2020, a review had been conducted of the law criminalising violence against women and children. The data showed a downward trend in terms of abuse, and it could be assumed that it was due to improved services and service providers. The State would conduct a full assessment of that law and would review the efforts of duty bearers at all levels, with findings to be drawn up to enhance the law. A law on safe spaces mandated that all schools needed to create a committee tasked with receiving cases of harassment in a way which ensured the protection of the plaintiff.
Tampering with the civil registry was punishable by imprisonment of up to 12 years. According to legislation, compared to sexual assault, rape was severely penalised as it might lead to unwanted procreation. Efforts continued toward comprehensive birth registration for children who in the context of displacement due to armed conflict were unregistered. There were rules for determining the status of refugees and stateless persons. The Philippines institutionalised protection services for stateless persons, asylum seekers and refugees, to ensure they had access to social services.
The sale of children was already penalised under the anti-trafficking in persons law. Child marriage was also punishable under the State’s new law which prohibited that practice. The Philippines had aided six countries in their prosecution of child pornography cases. There had been instances where a perpetrator was prosecuted in the country where they were located, and the Philippines authorities assisted by providing evidence. The definition in the Philippines of children with disabilities was based on United Nations conventions, and covered those who had long-term physical and sensory impairments.
Infant and child health outcomes showed improvements over the past two decades. The infant mortality rate showed a slow decline, and the Philippines was striving to reach its target rate of just 12 deaths per 1000 live births by 2030. The Philippines was on track to reach its target for anaemia reduction, and the prevalence of Vitamin A deficiency among children had been dramatically reduced between 2015-2019. The government had implemented “catch-up immunisation campaigns” and introduced “Vaccination Wednesdays” to encourage an uptick in immunisation rates. A vaccination playbook was issued to local government, to strengthen immunisation programmes across all localities. The Government was prioritising amending the vaccination law, giving it a penal provision to make vaccination mandatory. The Philippines had achieved its target of vaccinating 70 per cent of the 12 to 17-year-old age group against COVID-19.
The implementation of a supplementary feeding programme consisted of hot meals being served during children’s snack-time, over a period of 120 days. More than 600,000 indigenous households benefitted from funding provided by the Government.
Questions by Committee Experts
CLARENCE NELSON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Coordinator for the Philippines, noted that four out of five Filipino children grew up exposed to violence; that was very concerning. When did the State intend to finalise the plan against violence against children and roll it out nationally?
ANN MARIE SKELTON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, noted that schools had been closed for two years during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was one of the longest closures in the world. What had been learned from that, and would things be done differently next time? “Rescuing” street children was not necessarily the right approach; the Committee’s general comment 21 on children in street situations provided guidance in that regard. The risk of reprisals and confidentiality rules could not be a barrier to finding out what was happening to children in detention; protocols needed to be created around visits to such children. Children must not be criminalised, yet United Nations verified information stated that 24 children were still being detained in 2021 for their association with armed groups. Was there any improvement that could be made in that difficult area of work?
A Committee Expert asked what activities were being undertaken against measles? Was there a mechanism for early detection of children with disabilities?
A Committee Expert asked about corporal punishment; it was positive that a law would be adopted on that issue. When would the law be enacted? What was the State’s vision when it came to children with disabilities? Were all its plans compatible with a human-rights based vision for children with disabilities? Were mechanisms in place to evaluate the effectiveness of the plans?
HYND AYOUBI IDRISSI, Committee Vice Chair and Taskforce Member, asked for more information about children of Indonesian descent and Japanese descent.
A Committee Expert asked about the number of children deprived of liberty, the length of their detention and the reasons for their detention? Had the national preventative mechanism visited the places where children were deprived of liberty? Which plans were there to improve their conditions of detention? What were the complaint mechanisms in place for children in detention? Did each child entering the justice system have access to a lawyer?
BENYAM DAWIT MEZMUR, Committee Expert and Taskforce Member, said Philippines featured on the global hunger index; how were children targeted by services to address chronic food insecurity? Could more information be provided on child participation when it came to addressing climate change? Could more details be provided on alternative solutions to addressing drug addiction and dependency?
A Committee Expert asked about the issue of delays in court proceedings; could updated information be provided on that, and on legal aid? What were the opportunities for children living on small islands to participate at the national level?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said that many persons of Japanese descent were not able to acquire Japanese citizenship. The Government had established a national justice management system which captured case data from children as soon as they came into contact with the justice system. Any form of deprivation of liberty for children should be done as a measure of last resort.
There were a lot of things which needed to be done to respond to the needs of children with disabilities. In 2021, the State, in partnership with the United Nations Children’s Fund, had initiated a study which looked at the extra costs of raising children with disabilities in the Philippines. A series of consultations were underway with organizations of persons with disabilities. Children with disabilities were only referred to institutions if it was in their best interest.
Currently, there were nearly 1,700 paediatricians in the Philippines. Physical therapists were responsible for screening children early on and referring them to specialists. There were more than 74,000 children on the registry of persons with disabilities. Screening had been expanded from six to 28 disorders. Around 8 per cent of newborns were screened as of 2021, which assisted in early detection of children with disabilities. Tuberculosis remained prevalent in the Philippines, and children and the elderly were disproportionally affected. To address that, the Government included tuberculosis protocols in its guidelines for primary care providers.
Closing statements
CLARENCE NELSON, Committee Expert and Taskforce Coordinator for the Philippines, thanked the delegation for the frank exchange of information and ideas. The Committee was happy that the State was making progress in its legislation and hoped that would continue. Mr. Nelson wished the delegation safe travels back to the Philippines.
ANGELO M. TAPALES, Executive Director, Council for the Welfare of Children and head of the delegation , said the Government was committed to upholding its treaty obligations, particularly regarding the Convention. The Philippines had come a long way regarding children’s rights protection, but knew that more could be done. The observations of the Committee regarding the issues facing the children in the country would all be taken to heart, and the Government would take all necessary steps to address those concerns.
MIKIKO OTANI, Committee Chairperson, thanked the delegation for the dialogue and extended the best wishes of the Committee to the children of the Philippines.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the information media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
HRC22.027E