MANILA: They were Grade 9 boys, 14 and 15 years old, allegedly bullied for years. On the morning of June 22, they walked into San Jose National High School in Tacloban City in Leyte, central Philippines, and opened fire on their schoolmates, killing three and wounding 20.
And with that, they cracked open one of the most divisive questions in Philippine law: Who is old enough to be held criminally responsible for their actions?
Both suspects were arrested immediately, their identities withheld by the authorities. But the law treats them differently.
The 15-year-old faces multiple counts of murder and frustrated murder, while the 14-year-old, under the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, cannot be criminally charged. He will instead be referred to a rehabilitation facility – known as House of Hope – for children in conflict with the law.
For the mothers of two of the victims, that distinction cuts like a wound. They told the Philippine Daily Inquirer they want both suspects held fully accountable.
“He (the younger boy) was the one who did most of the shooting. He was the one who killed Chris,” said Erbea Fabian, whose 15-year-old son Chris Lorenz was among the dead.
“While I am angry with the 15-year-old suspect, the other suspect should also be held liable.”
Jenny Baldoria, the mother of 16-year-old Joyancee who had dreamt of taking a computer course in college, was equally unsparing. “How can I forgive him when he was the one who killed my Yancee?”
The attack, one of the deadliest school shootings in recent years in a country where such incidents remain rare, has since set off a fierce national debate over whether the juvenile justice law is fit for purpose.
It also comes amid a surge of student-related violence across the country. The authorities foiled a potential mass shooting at another Leyte school days after the Tacloban school shooting, and three separate stabbing incidents were recorded on campuses in different parts of the Philippines within the same week.
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr has already expressed a willingness to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility.
The Philippine National Police has backed proposals to set the threshold at 12, with spokesperson Allen Rae Co highlighting instances where children as young as nine have been involved in criminal activity. Interior Secretary Jonvic Remulla, speaking to the local media, cited the exploitation of minors by drug syndicates that deploy them precisely because they cannot be charged.
Senator Robin Padilla, who filed a Bill in July 2025 seeking to bring the minimum age down to 10, urged Marcos to call a special session of Congress to tackle it. Congress is on a break until July 27.
“If we are now mimicking America, where shootings are happening inside schools, then if we are truly serious about this, this is the kind of issue that warrants a special session,” he told reporters on June 22.
Police investigators revealed that one of the suspects had been posting violent videos online before the attack and was heavily influenced by online content, a detail that has added fuel to calls for legislation restricting minors’ access to violent games and platforms.
Police found that the 14-year-old suspect was playing GoreBox, described by its German manufacturer F2Games as a first-person shooting game where players can engage in “brutal combat with an extensive arsenal of weapons and explosives”. The government has temporarily blocked access to the game while investigating whether it played a role in the school shooting.
The Philippines maintains one of the highest minimum ages of criminal responsibility in Asia. Most of its neighbours have set the threshold at 14, Indonesia’s is 12 and Singapore’s 10.
The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has urged states not to lower thresholds already above 14 and has said any minimum below 12 is internationally unacceptable. In Singapore, offenders between 10 and 16 can be charged with offences, and their cases are typically handled in the Youth Court.
Tricia Clare Oco, executive director of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council, pushed back on the characterisation that the current law lets young offenders walk free.
Lowering the minimum age, she told state-run PTV on June 24, would not make children safer because it does not address why they turn violent in the first place.
“If we look at the drivers of violence, lowering the age does not automatically mean children will stop committing these acts,” she said, pointing to parts of the US where stricter laws have done little to stem school shootings.
She said the real culprits are closer to home: family breakdown, bullying, peer pressure and a media environment that normalises harm.
Courts, she added, may already order involuntary commitment to a House of Hope within 72 hours under existing law, with structured rehabilitation mandatory and parents exposed to civil liability.
Apart from law enforcement agencies, the Philippine Senate and the Commission on Human Rights are set to conduct their own probes into the deadly Tacloban school shooting.
“As the nation mourns this heartbreaking loss, we call on all concerned institutions to respond with urgency, compassion and fidelity to human rights principles,” the commission said in a statement.
“Only through a rights-based and child-sensitive approach can we honour the victims, support those affected, and help prevent similar tragedies from happening again.” - The Straits Times/ANN
