GROUP 5 SCRIPT
EMCEE: On behalf of the organizing committee, we are pleased to welcome you to our school. But before we start
our debate competition for today, I would like to introduce myself, I am Carlo Masaoy, the Emcee for this
competition. The Chief Judge for today is Mr. Decano glenn from umingan, Pangasinan. The timekeepers will be
Mr. Deloria and once you hear the sound, it means stop talking.
Everyone! Are you ready for a battle of wits? Today, we're diving into the hot topic of Lowering the Age of
Criminal Liability in the Philippines (from 15 to 9 yrs old). We have two fantastic teams ready to rumble,
presenting both sides of the argument. Remember, Folks, keep it respectful, but feel free to cheer on your favorite
team! And, Now. Let's hear it for our debaters!
I WILL INTRODUCED THE FIRST AFFIRMATIVE SPEAKER, MR. JOHN OAUL DOMANTAY
First Affirmative Speaker Template
INTRODUCTION
Good morning, dear ma'am gayo, Ladies and Gentlemen. I am John Paul Domantay, the first speaker of the
affirmative team.
DEFINITION
Good morning, esteemed judges, honorable opponents, and fellow debaters. Today, we stand in support of
lowering the age of criminal liability in the Philippines from 15 to 9 years old. Our society faces significant
challenges due to the current age limit, which allows children as young as 15 to engage in criminal activities
without facing appropriate consequences.
First and foremost, lowering the age of criminal liability will serve as a deterrent to juvenile crime. By holding
younger children accountable for their actions, we send a clear message that criminal behavior will not be tolerated
regardless of age. This can potentially discourage young individuals from engaging in illegal activities, thus
reducing crime rates in the long term.
ARGUMENTS ( Reasoning and Evidences)
Reasoning: Lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old aligns with international standards and practices.
Many countries around the world have set their minimum age of criminal responsibility below 15, recognizing
that children as young as 9 can comprehend the consequences of their actions and should be held accountable for
criminal behavior.
Evidence: According to a report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), over 60% of
countries worldwide have set their minimum age of criminal responsibility below 15 years old. This indicates a
global recognition of the fact that children as young as 9 are capable of understanding the impact of their actions
and should be subject to legal consequences for criminal behavior.
EMCEE; TANK YOU MR, DOMANTAY
AND NOW LET’S MOVE THE FIRST NEGATIVE SPEAKER. MR VENRICK QIUMADO
First Negative Speaker Template
INTRODUCTION
Ladies and gentleman, Esteemed Judges and Horonable opponents, good morning. My name is venrick qiumado
first speaker of negative team.
DEFINITION
First and foremost, lowering the age of criminal liability ignores the unique vulnerabilities and
developmental stages of children below the age of 15. At 9 years old, children are still in the early stages of
cognitive and moral development. They may not fully understand the consequences of their actions or possess the
ability to make informed decisions. Subjecting such young children to the harsh realities of the criminal justice
system could have long-lasting negative effects on their psychological well-being and future prospects for
rehabilitation.
Furthermore, lowering the age of criminal liability fails to address the root causes of juvenile delinquency. Instead
of focusing solely on punishment, we should prioritize prevention and intervention strategies that address socio-
economic disparities, family dysfunction, and lack of access to education and support services.
REBUTTAL
Thank you to the first affirmative speaker for their arguments. However, we must respectfully disagree with their
position. Firstly, while it's true that many countries have set their minimum age of criminal responsibility below
15, it's important to note that the cultural, social, and economic contexts vary significantly across different nations.
What works for one country may not necessarily be applicable or effective for another.
DOMANTAY; The argument presented by the first affirmative speaker regarding the international standards of
criminal responsibility is indeed relevant. However, it's crucial to recognize the contextual differences between
nations. What might be suitable for one country may not necessarily be appropriate for another due to variations in
cultural, social, and economic factors.
ARGRUMENTS [REASONS AND EVIDENCES]
Reasoning: Lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old fails to address the underlying social and
economic factors contributing to juvenile delinquency. Instead of focusing solely on punitive measures, such as
incarceration, we should prioritize investing in education, social services, and community-based programs that
address the root causes of youth crime.
Evidence: According to a study conducted by the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), socioeconomic factors
such as poverty, lack of access to education, and family dysfunction are significant contributors to juvenile
delinquency in the Philippines. In many cases, children engage in criminal activities as a means of survival or due
to exposure to violence and substance abuse in their communities.
EMCEE THANK YOU MR QUIMADO,
AND NOW LET’S MOVE TO THE SECOND AFFIRMATIVE SPEAKER. MR GERALD DECANO
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE SPEAKER TEMPLATE
INTRODUCTION
Good Morning, Dear Maam Gayo. Ladies And Gentlemen. I am GERALD DECANO The second speaker of
affirmative Team.
DEFINITION
As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs. Whether to lower the age of criminal
liability in the Philippines from 15 to 9 years old is a complex and controversial issue that involves considerations
of psychology, sociology, criminology, and human rights.
REBUTTAL Firstly, I'd like to address the assertion made by the second speaker of the affirmative team regarding
the effectiveness of lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old in deterring crime. While they argue that it
would serve as a deterrent, numerous studies have shown that harsher punishments for juveniles do not necessarily
lead to reduced crime rates.
QUIMADO; Absolutely, the notion that lowering the age of criminal liability would serve as a deterrent fails to
acknowledge the complex socio-economic factors underlying juvenile delinquency. Research indicates that
deterrence alone is ineffective in addressing youth crime.
ARGRUMENTS [REASONS AND EVIDENCES]
Reasoning: Lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old ensures greater protection for children who may be
coerced or manipulated into criminal activities by older individuals. By holding younger children accountable for
their actions, we create a deterrent against exploitation and provide a means of intervention and support to prevent
further victimization.
Evidence: According to a report by the Child Rights International Network (CRIN), children below the age of 15
are often coerced or manipulated by older individuals into engaging in criminal activities such as drug trafficking,
gang involvement, and sexual exploitation. Lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old would provide
greater protection for these vulnerable children and enable authorities to intervene early to prevent further
victimization and exploitation.
EMCEE; THANK YOU MR. GERALD DECANO, AND LASTLY THE SECOND NEGATIVE SPEAKER,
MR JM RODRIGO
INTRODUCTION
Good Morning Dear maam Gayo. And classmates. I am JM RODRIGO The second speaker of the
Nrgative team.
DEFINITION;
As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions or feelings. However, I can present arguments against
lowering the age of criminal liability in the Philippines from 15 to 9 years old based on various perspectives:
Developmental immaturity: Children under the age of 15 are still in the process of cognitive, emotional, and moral
development. Lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old may not align with their level of understanding
and maturity. Holding such young children criminally responsible may hinder their ability to rehabilitate and
reintegrate into society. Lack of effectiveness: Research suggests that punitive measures, such as incarceration,
may not effectively deter juvenile crime or address the underlying causes of delinquency. Lowering the age of
criminal liability without comprehensive social interventions and support systems may exacerbate rather than
alleviate the issue of youth involvement in criminal activities.
ARGRUMENTS [REASONS AND EVIDENCES]
Reasoning: Lowering the age of criminal liability to 9 years old in the Philippines could harm children's
development and rehabilitation prospects. Evidence: Psychological research consistently shows that children lack
the cognitive maturity to fully understand the consequences of their actions, and their brains are still developing
well into their teenage years. Therefore, treating them as criminals rather than addressing underlying social and
familial issues could exacerbate the problem rather than solve it.
EMCEE; WHAT A WONDERFUL PERFORMANCE FOR OUR DEBATERS, AND NOW LETS HERE THE
QUESTIONS OF OUR JUDGES.
JUDGES QUESTIONS;
1. DECANO GLENN; MR. FIRST SPESKER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE TEAM. Could you please outline how
lowering the age of criminal liability in the Philippines to 9 years old aligns with the principles of justice and
rehabilitation for young offenders?"
DOMANTAY; Lowering the age of criminal liability in the Philippines to 9 years old aligns with the principles of
justice by holding individuals accountable for their actions regardless of age. It also aims to deter criminal
behavior among young offenders by establishing clear consequences for their actions. Additionally, by intervening
at an earlier age, the justice system can provide appropriate rehabilitation and support to help young offenders
reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens.
DECANO GLENN; Thank you Mr, Domantay
RHEYDEN DIONISIO; MR. FIRST SPEAKER IN THE NEGATIVE TEAM. what specific aspect of lowering
the age of criminal liability in the Philippines would you like to ask about?
QUIMADO; One aspect worth considering is the potential impact on the rehabilitation and reintegration of young
offenders into society. How do you believe lowering the age of criminal liability could affect efforts to support and
rehabilitate young individuals who have committed crimes?
DECANO GLENN; MR. SECOND SPEAKER OF AFFIRMATIVE TEAM; How do you propose to address
concerns about the psychological and emotional development of children aged 9 to 15, considering the potential
consequences of being tried and punished within the criminal justice system?"
DECANO GERALD ; THANK YOU SIR FOR THAT QUESTION ; To address concerns about the psychological
and emotional development of children aged 9 to 15, we propose implementing specialized rehabilitation and
intervention programs tailored to their age group.
RHEYDEN DIONISIO; MR, SECOND SPEAKER OF NEGATIVE TEAM THIS IS YOUR QUESTION;
How do you intend to address concerns about the potential increase in stigma and labeling of children as criminals
at such a young age, and the long-term impact this could have on their future opportunities and rehabilitation
prospects?"
JM RODRIGO; This includes prioritizing rehabilitation over punishment and providing support services to address
the root causes of juvenile delinquency. Additionally, public awareness campaigns can be launched to educate
society about the complexities of juvenile behavior and the importance of second chances in rehabilitation and
reintegration.
EMCEE: THANK YOU JUDGES AND DEBATERS. HERE WE ARE AT LAST PART OF THIS EVENT. LET
US HEAR THE COMMENTS, WHO WILL BE THE BEST SPEAKER AND WHO WILL WIN THIS
DEBATE! OUR HEAD JUDGE. DECANO GLENN .
DECANO GLENN; Thank you both teams for a well-fought debate on the topic of legalizing Prostitution in the
Philippines. Both sides presented strong arguments and effectively used their time. To the Affirmative Team.
While they had a strong grasp of the issue, they could have benefited from spending more time addressing the
opposing viewpoint of negative team. And to the negative Team. the delivery was passionate, but it would be even
more effective if they could slow down their speech slightly to allow the audience to absorb their points. This was
a close debate, and both teams deserve credit for their performance. Ultimately, me and the other judges has
decided that the best speaker is no other than Mr. Guba and the winner of this debate will be... THE
AFFIRMATIVE TEAM. Thank you and congratulations to all.
