Chapter 1

THE PROBLEM AND ITS SETTING

Background of the Study

The implementation of minor’s safekeeping ordinance is the obligation to

protect minors or children from being at risk of becoming a juvenile delinquent.

Most countries introduced laws to protect and prevent children and young

persons from specific threats or harms.

In the United Kingdom, the children Act of 1908 was introduced followed

by the children and young person of 1920 with a bundle of laws to protect young

persons and children in the early 20th century. The children and young person’s

act of 1933 consolidated the laws into a single law (Delap, 2007).

In New York City, they imposed curfews on all ages. But those restrictions

are not citywide and are in designated areas such as parks. For minors only,

these are imposed when driving in the state of New York between 9:00 PM and

5:00 AM. During those hours, they will need to adhere to the night driving

curfews of other restrictions to avoid suspension of their drivers license if not with

a licensed driver twenty-one(21 and older. While exploring New York by foot or

by a vehicle, there are places to keep in mind on your travels as you could be

approached by local police or the venue’s security team (411

newyork.org/guide,2009).
 2

In the Philippines, many cities started enforcing old ordinances imposing

curfews on minors. The operation implements such curfews ordinances was part

of OPLANRODY or Rid the streets of Drinkers and Youths. The ordinances were

there long before Duterte won but only recently implemented due to Prody’s

campaign promise to impose a curfew in the streets as part of his anti-crime

campaign. Quezon City rounded up 25 minors for violating the curfew and Cavite

City police officer hold 29 minors that disturbed the resident’s property and most

of their property are not valuable to pay others. Caloocan City local police

arrested and hold 70 minors for playing the computer in late night. Las Pinas City

local police arrested and picked up 57 minors. Pasay City police rounded up

around 80 minors. Other cities also followed suit. (kami.com.ph/14667)

In such way, the local government of General Santos City is pushing for

the strict enforcement of an ordinance that secure the implementation of laws

pertaining to the protection of minors or children’s rights accounts for one of the

governments most important mandate, considering the persistence occurrence of

juvenile delinquency in the Filipino society, and considering as well that children

are more vulnerable to certain forms of neglect and abuse (SPPO No.1718,2017)

Therefore, it is necessary to the general public to have knowledge about

the implementation of minor’s safekeeping ordinance in GSC, and how it helps to

improve the reduction of crime delinquency prevalence to Barangay East, for this

reason, the researchers were strongly motivated to conduct a study involving the

Implementation of minor’s safekeeping ordinance.

 3

Statement of the Problem

This study wanted to find out the implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping

Ordinance in General Santos City and crime and delinquency prevalence for the

year 2017.

Specifically, it sought answers to the following sub-problem;

1. What is the level of Implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance in

Barangay East General Santos City?

2. What is the extent of the crime and delinquency prevalence?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the level of implementation of

Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and the extent crime and delinquency

prevalence?

Hypothesis

Ho3: There is no significant relationship between the level of

implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and the extent of crime and

delinquency prevalence?
 4

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework of the study illustrates the independent and

dependent variable of the study. The implementation of minor safekeeping

ordinance in GSC has served as the independent variable of the study while the

crime delinquency prevalence to is representing the dependent variable. The

arrow line signifies the correlation between the two variables under investigation.
 5

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE DEPENDENT VARIABLE

Level of Implementation Extent of Crime and

Minor’s Safekeeping Delinquency Prevalence

Ordinance no.3

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of the Study

 6

Significance of the Study

This study would be useful and beneficial to the following persons.

Administrators: This will help them to determine the importance of minor

safekeeping about the management of public affairs and the government.

Brgy Personnel: This research would aid them on how to monitor the

minor’s safekeeping in their specific barangay.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The researchers focused their study on determining whether the level of

implementation of minor safekeeping ordinance in GSC and the extent crime

delinquency prevalence.

The study was limited to the residents of General Santos City. Data were

confined to the information gathered through a questionnaire. It was conducted in

the city of General Santos. Each respondent was given a survey questionnaire.

Definition of Terms

The following terms were defined operationally for a more precise

understanding of the study.

Level of Implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance.This refers

to the determination of the level of implementation of minor’s safekeeping

ordinance code no.3 in General Santos City and how it helps the minor’s from

making mistakes against the law.

 7

Criminal Delinquency. This refers to the action of minor children

untoward the norms law of the society

Prevalence. It refers to the fact or condition of being prevalence

commonness.

Minors. This refers to the person under the age of full legal responsibility.

Safekeeping Ordinance Code no.3 –it is a law that was implemented in

Barangay East to secure the safety of the minors.

 8

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This Chapter discusses the related literature and studies which are useful

and necessary for this research and intensive undertakings.

Around the world, children languish behind bars, sometimes for protracted

periods. In many cases, as with T.W., they face brutal and inhumane conditions.

The lack of record-keeping and a wide array of institutions mean that the number

of children held worldwide in such environments is not known. The United

Nations Children’s Fund, UNICEF, has estimated that more than 1 million

children are behind bars around the world. Many are held in decrepit, abusive,

and demeaning conditions, deprived of education, access to meaningful

activities, and regular contact with the outside world. Many of these children and

adults who were convicted of crimes committed when they were children have

received excessive or disproportionate sentences that violate international law,

which requires that imprisonment of children be in “conformity with the law and

shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate

period of time.” (Bochenek, 2012)

Juvenile curfew laws were a popular intervention to combat juvenile

crime during the 1980s and 1990s. An experimental replication design was

used to examine the impact of the Washington, D.C. “Juvenile Curfew Act of

1995.” Juvenile arrest data were analyzed using a two-standard-deviation-band

approach, t-test, and trend analysis. The results, consistent with previous
 9

studies, revealed that the curfew law did not reduce total juvenile arrests.

Several flaws inherent in curfew laws, as well as implications for research and

policy, are discussed. (Cole, 2003)

In relation to curfews since the 1990s, millions of teenagers have been

arrested for breaking curfew, which a policy analysis shows have a

disproportionate impact on minorities. Around 11:00 pm, on a temperate Friday

last August, Officer Troy Owens was patrolling south-eastern San Diego. Peering

through his driver’s side window into the darkness, he scanned the streets until

his eyes stopped on the corner of 47th and Market. “Somebody is trying to hide

from me?” he wondered aloud. “Yup,” he answered, swinging the SUV around,

and turning on the flashing lights. Owens, who has worked for the San Diego

police department for nearly 20 years, pulled toward the curb and got out of his

car. As he approached, three teenagers slowly slunk out from behind an

electrical box: a boy, David, 15, whose identity, along with those of other minors,

is being protected, and two girls. Heads hanging, shoulders slouched, they knew

they were caught. All three were soon searched, handcuffed, and put in the back

of cars for the ride to the command post – a local Boys & Girls Club. (Root, 2016)

According to Elizabeth Calvin, an advocate in the children's rights division of

Human Rights Watch, says that "There is no more important decision that this

county makes about a child, no more far-reaching impact on a child's life than to

put them into the adult system," she said. "It's an important decision that

deserves essential resources.

 10

West New York located in New Jersey had a curfew that was implemented

on teenagers. The ordinance provided exceptions for juveniles traveling to or

from work, engaged in a medical emergency or traveling to or from events

sponsored by the community or religious organizations. New York teens visiting

West New York, NJ had to be aware of violators, and their parents/guardians

were subject to fines of up to US$1,000, and up to 90 days of community service.

(Pringle, 2013)

According to a 1997 report by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, 80% of the

347 cities surveyed had instituted some type of curfew for their younger

residents. However, past scholarship on youth curfews has found little evidence

that they are an effective crime deterrent and has suggested that such

restrictions may exacerbate racial profiling and civil rights violations. A 2011

study published in The American Law and Economics Review by the University

of California, Berkeley, The Impact of Juvenile Curfew Laws on Arrests of Youth

and Adults,” analyzes data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Unified

Criminal Reporting files from 1980 to 2004 for the 54 larger U.S. cities (180,000-

plus residents) that enacted youth curfews between 1985 and 2002. The

researcher focuses on arrests for both minor offenses (loitering and curfew

violations) and more serious infractions (such as violent crimes and property

crimes). (Weigel, 2011)

Juvenile curfews aim to reduce crime through incapacitation: if we tell

young people to go home earlier at night, we hope they will have less opportunity

to get into trouble. Juvenile curfews are extremely common in the United States
 11

—most large cities have them, as do many smaller cities and towns. They

typically apply to those under age 18, and the punishment for breaking curfew is

usually fine. Our study suggests that juvenile curfews increase gun violence, and

therefore impose a cost on society by decreasing public safety. This doesn’t

mean that curfews don’t have some positive effects. It’s possible that juvenile

curfews reduce other types of crime (for example, minor offenses such as

vandalism) that might be uncorrelated with gun violence. To the extent that those

types of offenses are a concern, and if they are reduced more than gun violence

is increased, local jurisdictions might find juvenile curfews worthwhile. (Doleac,

2015)

The justification for juvenile curfew ordinances in the 1990's is the same

as it has always been, to reduce juvenile delinquency, and most issues in the

current policy debate over juvenile curfews have been argued before. Key issues

related to juvenile curfews include enforceability, whether they represent an

effective use of police resources, rights of minors, infringement on parental

authority, police bias and abuse, how much juvenile crime occurs at night, and

juvenile delinquency prevention. Findings from the study of 200 U.S. cities

showed that the number of juvenile curfew ordinances increased from 93 (47

percent) of the 200 cities in 1990 to 146 (73 percent) of the 200 cities in 1995.

The surge in juvenile curfew enactments was most dramatic in the largest cities.

Of the 200 cities, 50 revised an existing juvenile curfew. Of the 146 cities with

juvenile curfews, 112 cities designated one age group, 28 designated two age

groups, and only six designated three age groups; 107 cities set 17 as the top
 12

age group, 32 set 16 as the top age group, and 6 set 15 as the top age group.

Eighty cities had the same curfew hours every night of the year, while 46 cities

varied curfew hours for weekdays and weekends. Sixty-five cities set midnight as

the latest hour for curfews to begin, 35 set 10 p.m. as the latest hour, and 33 set

11 p.m. as the latest hour. The most common comment by police officers about

juvenile curfew enforcement was that the curfew was simply another "tool" for

regular patrol officers 31 references, 1 note, and 2 tables.(Reynolds, 1996)

Juvenile curfew laws restrict the presence of minors in certain locations

during certain hours. Curfew laws can restrict minors from certain public areas,

such as a mall, or from public areas in general, such as city streets. Local or

state governments typically create curfew laws as a means of combating juvenile

crime.Juvenile curfew laws should describe the age group who are restricted, the

specific hours of restriction, the locations the age group cannot be in, and any

exceptions or exemptions that may apply. For example, a juvenile curfew law

may state “a person under the age of 16 cannot be in a public place within the

City of San Jose without adult supervision between the hours of 10:00 pm and

5:00 am. Parents are often liable for their minor child’s violation of curfew laws.

Penalties often involve fines of about $400-$600, community service, driver’s

license restrictions, and/or jail time. (Cheung, 2015)

Crime reports for San Diego show a 7.7 percent drop in the number of

juveniles who are victims of violent crimes during the after-school hours between

1996 and 1997, a 24.3 percent drop during curfew hours, and a 13.8 percent
 13

decrease during the day. The arrests of juveniles during curfew hours also

dropped by 8.5 percent. (Jacobson, 1998)

Most teenagers are used to curfews imposed by their parents, and more

and more are finding that they also have to face a curfew imposed by local law

enforcement. In Georgia, teens may face both a general curfew and a driving

curfew, depending on the city in which they live. The times for these curfews will

vary by city and according to age. The curfew laws for teenagers will vary by city

across Georgia. For example, in Alpharetta, teens 17 and younger are not

permitted to be out later than 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, or later than

11:59 p.m. Friday or Saturday. Curfew ends at 6 a.m. the next day. In Dekalb

County, anyone 16 and younger cannot be out between the hours of midnight

and 5 a.m. on any day. Curfew laws typically apply to any public places, including

parks, buildings and streets. When teens violate curfew, they may be subject to

penalties, but most often, it is their parents who must pay the price. In the city of

East Point, parents initially receive a warning, and after that, they are subject to a

$1,000 fine or up to 60 days in jail. Parents in Atlanta face the same penalties.

Teens that violate the driving curfew may be subject to fines, points on their

license or a license suspension. (Magher, 2015)

Aggressive police enforcement of night times curfews "has not significantly

decreased" violent crime or reduced the number of young crime victims

according to a Los Angeles Police Department report submitted to the City

Council on Monday. Having task forces to enforce curfew is not always a cost-

effective method or the best utilization of [police] personnel and other resources,
 14

concludes the report sent by Police Chief Bernard C. Parks to the council's Public

Safety Committee. As a result, Parks recommends that LAPD command officers

be given discretion to use special curfew enforcement teams only if they need

them. Two years ago, the Los Angeles Police Commission and the City Council

directed police captains to crack down on nighttime’s curfew violators in their

areas. During a six-month period ending last October, the LAPD dispatched 101

curfew task forces, expending more than 3,600 officer-hours and citing more than

4,800 juvenile curfew violators. (LAIT, 1998)

The result of being a juvenile delinquent is the increasing incidence of

runaways, teenage suicides, teenage parenthood, and a series of unhappy

marriages and divorces. In this new millennium, children seem to be getting less

nurturing and support from within their family. Instead, children are spending

more and more time in front of televisions, computers, and surfing the Internet in

order to ascertain where to buy guns and homemade bombs of which contribute

to the delinquency problem.4 However, we cannot always place the blame on

parents; at times children just want to listen to their peers and follow their advice.

If we look into other variables, such as age, sex, type of offense, and quality of

single parent-child relationship, we could reach a conclusion that it is not

necessarily the parent who is at fault. We cannot correlate one factor to

determine why juveniles commit crimes. I researched juvenile behavior dealing

exclusively with girls, and I found that girls tend to be juvenile delinquents when

they lose emotional touch with their family or someone close to them. Most girls

are arrested for incorrigibility, running away, gang involvement, and sex offenses;
 15

while most boys are arrested for vandalism, theft, assault, rape, drugs and some

major offenses. (Wickliffe, 2018)

Even though they cannot yet vote, many people under the age of 18

participate in our society nearly as much as adults. We let teenagers have jobs

and drive cars, and we expect them to behave responsibly when they act

independently. Sometimes, however, we are reminded of their youth. When

a minor is charged with a crime, the situation can rapidly become more

complicated. At one time, there was no distinction between adults and children in

the courts. All cases went to the same place, and the same laws applied. Illinois

was the first state to establish a separate court for minors in 1899, and other

states soon followed. Although the practice is very controversial, it is still not rare

to see minors tried as adults. Trial as an adult means being subject to the same

laws and punishments that adults face, including time behind bars. Sentences in

juvenile courts tend to be less harsh, and the institutions they are sent to focus

more on rehabilitation and skills for transitioning into the world. Nonetheless,

many young people who are released from these institutions fall back into the

prison system. A minor who has been accused of a crime needs effective and

committed legal counsel. Being convicted of a criminal offense or harshly

penalized at a young age can have consequences that will affect the rest of a

person’s life. (Bruno, 2018)

Laws that require adolescents to be off the streets during certain hours are

an old idea that is making a strong comeback. Dating back to the 1800s, youth
 16

curfew laws have seen a strong resurgence that began in the early 1980s and

has steadily increased. A 2000 study found that the number of newly enacted

curfew laws is rising at about 3 percent a year, and police officers report that

enforcement of many long-standing curfew laws has intensified, due to growing

concern about gangs and youth crime as curfew laws gain popularity, youth

advocates are working more actively to oppose them. They have increased court

challenges to the laws’ constitutionality, citing violations of youths’ First

Amendment rights to free expression and assembly, as well as to freedom of

movement and due process. They also are actively working to educate

communities about how these laws fail to reduce juvenile crime, and negatively

impact youth. (Schwartz 2016)

Juvenile crime is not a new phenomenon. The number of crimes

committed by juveniles and the severity of those offenses increases and

decreases over time for reasons that are not clear. Over one million juveniles are

tried in state juvenile courts annually in the United States. State laws vary, but, in

general, juvenile criminals are treated differently than adult offenders. For most

crimes, youths are prosecuted in juvenile courts and, if warranted, sent to

correctional facilities for the dual purpose of punishment and rehabilitation. Most

are not detained beyond the age of 18 or 21the U.S. Supreme Court ruled for

Simmons. It found that the “evolving standards of decency” test made it “cruel

and unusual” to execute a juvenile who was under the age of 18 when the

murder was committed. It also found that there was a “national consensus”
 17

among the states not to execute those convicted of committing crimes before

reaching the age of 18. (Suter, 2015)

Child at risk refers to a child who is vulnerable to and at the risk of

committing criminal offenses because of personal, family and social

circumstances, such as, but not limited to, the following : a. Being abused by any

person through sexual, physical, psychological, mental, economic or any other

means and the parents or guardian refuse, are unwilling or unable to provide

protection for the child; b. Being exploited including sexually or economically c.

Being abandoned or neglected, and after diligent search and inquiry, the parent

or guardian cannot be found;(d. Coming from a dysfunctional or broken family or

without a parent or guardian; e. Being out of school f. Being a street child g.

Being a member of a gang h. Living in a community with a high evel of criminality

or drug abuse and I. Living in situations of armed conflict. (Soriano, 2016)

The word “delinquent” means many things. For some, a delinquent is one who

has committed an offense against an individual and this offense is punishable

under our criminal law. For others, he is a person who has broken only minor

laws; those that do not disturb the public conscience too much. To the social

worker, “a delinquent is a person, of whatever age, whose attitude toward other

individuals, toward the community, toward lawful authority is such that it may lead

him into breaking the law. Delinquency can be divided into different classes. One

class is the environment delinquents. Environmental delinquents are the

occasional lawbreakers. The second class is the emotionally maladjusted

delinquents. These delinquents are the chronic law breakers who make breaking
 18

of laws a habit they cannot avoid or escape from. The third is the psychiatric

delinquents. Psychiatric delinquency is related to serious emotional disturbances

in the family or to mental ill-health. When a person becomes delinquent due to

mental illness, he is classified as a psychiatric delinquent. (Sanchez, 1997)

Current discussions centre on juvenile delinquency efforts focused on

several key components. The first relates to the notion of providing a continuum

of services to youth at different stages of the child welfare and juvenile justice

systems, providing both assistance and sanctions appropriate to individual

children in individual situations. For example, families and schools should

respond immediately when a youth stars to misbehave at school of his or her

grades begin to suffer. It is hoped that immediate intervention will help remedy

antisocial behaviour before it becomes more disruptive, criminal, or violent in

nature. Youth commit the most serious delinquent acts during their teen years

and early adulthood. The earlier a juvenile commits a violent offense, the more

likely he or she will commit crimes as an adult. Other less serious infractions

such as shoplifting, running away, staying out late, sexual promiscuity, and

vandalism occur much earlier and are frequently also predictive of future patters

of delinquent behaviour. These immediate intervention efforts involve all of the

core institutions that contribute to a youth’s environment. Efforts to crub youth

violence should be inclusive of the various stakeholders living with the problems

or charged with finding solutions to youth crime. These stakeholders include

families. Neighborhood committees, businesses, landlords, law enforcement

 19

agencies, public and private health and human services providers, educators,

and state and local government. (Soriano, 2016)

There is a saying that history often repeats itself. If this is a true saying,

then society will have to deal with the complex issue of juvenile’s delinquents,

who may eventually become adult criminals, as societies in time past dealt with

the same conflict. Moreover, if this saying is true then the community in which

juvenile delinquencies exist must have the tools necessary to divert the youth

from crime. If one is to convert delinquent youth’s behavior, they need to be able

to variegate the justice system in order to prevent juvenile delinquent recidivisms.

Furthermore, understanding the cause of juvenile delinquency is an important

key in its prevention. In order to understand the cause of juvenile delinquency,

the history of the juvenile justice and varies approach to prevent it need to be

examined. “The history of the juvenile justice in the United States began during

the colonial period. Before it inception the family was the main origin of social

control of the youth” (Bartollas & Miller, 2008, p.5). In the frontier years, the

upbringing of children was not the task of the government. The youths were

subject to the parents rules and were punished by them. However, as society

developed and the city become larger juvenile behavior evolved as well

furthermore, “in the 1800s, the state seeing growth of developing cites and the

effect it was having on the young population, they felt the need to develop a

system to control the youth” (Bartollas & Miller, 2008, p.6). 

In the Philippines, Aside from the resumption of President Rodrigo

Duterte’s drug war, a police campaign bearing his name and targeting curfew
 20

violators and roadside drinkers has also returned. More than a hundred persons,

including minors, were rounded up by the Parañaque City police from Friday

night to Saturday morning as authorities implemented OplanRody (Rid the

Streets of Drunkards and Youths). Senior Supt. Jemar Modequillo, Parañaque

police chief, said at least 103 residents of Barangays San Dionisio and San Isidro

were briefly detained. Forty-six were held for violating the 10 p.m. curfew for

minors, 31 for drinking in public and 15 for going out shirtless in the streets.

NickFerrer of the City Public Information Office said Mayor Edwin Olivarez asked

the local police to strictly implement the city ordinances that also form the basis

of OplanRody after receiving complaints from subdivision residents.Modequillo

said the minors were released immediately to their parents while 46 adults were

also let go after they did “40 pushups.”OplanRody was launched in the first week

of July 2016; days after Mr.Duterte assumed the presidency. It was followed

weeks later by the more controversial OplanTokhang, which targeted suspected

drug users and pushers based on a watch list drawn up by the barangays.The

youth group Samahan ng Progresibong Kabataan challenged the constitutionality

of OplanRody in the Supreme Court, which on July 27 issued a temporary

restraining order on the implementation of curfew ordinances in Manila, Quezon

City, and Navotas. (Cabalza, 2017)

JANSEN, 15, has no real place to call home. He used to be a street kid in

Malabon City, where he joined a drug syndicate after running away from his
 21

father last year. He started using crystal meth and made enough money to get

by.

Last November, police arrested him for theft. Afterward, he slept on a cold

concrete floor, behind bars with eight other children sharing three blankets.

Sunlight creeps into their room through windows barred by two sets of grills,

installed after seven children used a handsaw to escape. Jansen himself

attempted to escape twice.But he is not in jail. He’s in a BahayPag-Asa (BPA), a

government-run center for children in conflict with the law (CICL), or those who

are alleged, accused or adjudged as having committed an offense under

Philippine laws.Each highly urbanized city is required to have a BPA by Republic

Act No. 9344, or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act enacted a decade ago and

amended by Republic Act No. 10630 in 2013. The law spares CICL from being

put in prison and refers them instead to a BPA, designed to care for children in

need of rehabilitation or whose court cases are still pending.

Under the guidelines adopted in 2015 by the Juvenile Justice and Welfare

Council (JJWC), BPAs must help children “appreciate their worth and rebuild

their lives. (Cabildo and Cruz, 2016)

 22

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the researchers present the research design, research

instrument, data gathering procedure and the statistical method used.

Research Design

The descriptive correlation designed was used in this study. It was

deemed appropriate to use to determine the level of implementation of minor’s

safekeeping ordinance in general Santos city and crime delinquency prevalence.

This process involves information of gathering data with its corresponding

assessment and analysis.

Locale of the Study

This study was conducted in General Santos City in the province of South

Cotabato in the Philippines. It is a highly urbanized city located in a Southern

portion of Cotabato. But perhaps its biggest claim to fame is that boxer Manny

Pacquiao is native. It is known as the “Tuna Capital of the Philippines” and also

home to a lot of media practitioners and media companies. The questionnaires

had been administered to the Barangay Officials or personnel in General Santos

City.

Research Instrument

The measuring instrument used in this study was a questionnaire.

Through this, the purpose of determining the level of implementation of minor’s

 23

safekeeping ordinance in General Santos City would be realized. The three

experts validated it; one came from the criminology faculty, the other one was a

master’s degree holder in English, and the last was one of the respondents of the

study.

Respondents and Sampling Used

The respondents of the study were the Barangay official and personnel in

Barangay East in General Santos City. They were considered as the

respondents because they are the ones responsible for supervising the children

in their specific area, whether they would follow the ordinance or not. They used

the convenience sampling technique to answer the survey questionnaire that the

researchers distributed to them.

Data Gathering Procedure

In the data gathering, the researchers observed the following procedures:

Asking Permission to Conduct The Study. The researchers wrote a letter

request asking permission to the Barangay official at Barangay East in General

Santos City to allow them to conduct the study.

Distribute of Questionnaires. Upon the approval of the letter of request, the

researchers personally distributed the survey questionnaire to the official and

personnel in Barangay East.

 24

Retrieval of Questionnaire.The researcher also personally collected the

questionnaire as soon as the respondents had finished answering the survey

questionnaire.

Collection and Tallying of Data. The data retrieved were collated and tallied.

Statistical Treatment of Data.

The following statistical tools were used for the interpretations and

analyses of the data.

Weighted Mean. This was used to determine the level of implementation of

minor’s safekeeping ordinance in general Santos city.

 25

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the analyses and interpretations the data gathered.

The various results regarding the level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping

Ordinance and the extent of the crime and delinquency prevalence in Barangay

East, General Santos City for the year 2017-2018 are presented in the following

tables.

Level of Implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance

The researchers aimed to determine the level of implementation on

Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance in Barangay East. It is shown in Table 1 that it

has an overall mean of 3.22 which means implemented. This implies that the

level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance in the barangay was

implemented.

In details, the barangay has implemented the ordinance by not allowing

minors outside of their residence or beyond their property line during the

safekeeping hours unless accompanied by his or her parents. It has the highest

mean of 3.47. It is followed by 3.28 in which they also implemented it by

notifying the police, barangay officials, barangay tanods and any social worker

that a minor is in the premises of the establishment during the safekeeping hours

and refuse to leave and the minor shall only be released to the parent, guardian

or any other adult person having custody of the minor and just after having

signed and agreed upon and abide by the conditions of penalties and
 26

interventions of this ordinance. The barangay also implemented the ordinance

because the parent or guardian will be located and be notified in the shortest

possible time and in case they cannot be located, the minor will stay in the

custody of the station chief of police or barangay captain for the maximum of

three days with a mean of 3.25. Notice that the lowest mean is 3.07 however it is

still described as implemented.

 27

Table 1.
Level of Implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance
Indicators Mean Description
1. No minors shall be outside of their
residence or beyond their property line during
3.47 Implemented
the safekeeping hours unless accompanied
by their parents.
2. Minors shall be prohibited from entering, Implemented
staying or be present in any public places or 3.12
establishment during safekeeping hours.
3. Parents of Minors, or other Adult person Implemented
having the custody of the minor, commits an
offense if he/she knowingly permits, or allow 3.12
the minor to be or remain in any public place
or establishment during safekeeping hours.
4. The owner, operator, or any employee of Implemented
an establishment commits an offense if he or
she knowingly allows a minor to be present or 3.22
remain in the premises of the establishment
during safekeeping hour.
5. The owner, operator, or any employee of Implemented
an establishment should immediately notify
the police, barangay officials, barangay
3.28
tanods or any social worker, that a minor is in
the premises of the establishment during
safekeeping hours and refuse to leave.
6. Any minor being rescued during the Implemented
safekeeping hour will be brought to the
3.10
barangay hall kababayan center or DSWD for
profiling and safekeeping.
7. Parent or guardian will be located and be Implemented
3.25
notified in the shortest time possible.
8. The minor shall only be released to the Implemented
parent, guardian or any other adult person
having custody of the minor and only after
3.28
having signed and agreed upon and abide by
to the conditions of the penalties and
interventions of this ordinance
9 In case that parents or guardian can’t be Implemented
located, the minor will stay in the custody of
3.25
the station chief of police or barangay captain
for a maximum of three(3)days.
10. Penalties, intervention, and the imposition
of fines for the parent, guardian or any other
adult person having custody of the minor are 3.07 Implemented
Counselling, Community service,
Imprisonment.
Overall Mean 3.22 Implemented

Legend:
Scale Range Description
4 3.50-4:00 Very
 28

highly implemented 3 2.50-3.49

Highly Implemented 2 1.50-
2.49 Implemented 1
1.00-1.49 Not Implemented at all

Extent of Crime and Delinquency Prevalence

This study also aimed to determine the extent of crime and delinquency

prevalence in the barangay. Table 2 shows that it has an overall mean of 2.48

which means sometimes. This implies that there is sometimes crime and

delinquency prevalence in the barangay.

Mainly, the youth are often caught in a gang war. It has the highest mean

of 2.77. It followed by 2.69 in which the youth are also often caught in a riot. The

youth also often caught violated the curfew hour with a mean of 2.68. It is

observed that the lowest mean is 2.23 which about the involvement of youth in

sexual extortion, however, it sometimes happened.

 29

Table 2

Extent of Crime and Delinquency Prevalence in the Barangay

Indicators Mean Description

1. Youth caught in some establishment
2.52 Often
committing robbery.
2. Youth caught in a gang war. 2.77 Often
3. Youth caught because they commit Sometimes
2.32
motor vehicle theft.
4. Youth caught because they commit Sometimes
2.34
rape.
5. Youth are involved in carnapping. 2.32 Sometimes
6. Youth are used as a carrier of drugs. 2.33 Sometimes
7. Youth are involved in sexual Sometimes
2.23
extortion.
8. Youth caught because of violating Often
2.68
curfew hours.
9. Youth caught bringing deadly Often
2.57
weapons.
10. Youth caught in a riot. 2.69 Often
Overall Mean 2.48 Sometimes

Significant Relationship between Variables

This study aimed to determine if there is a significant relationship between

the level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and extent of

crime and delinquency prevalence in Barangay East, General Santos City. The

negative correlation is expected in this study; that is if the level of implementation

of the ordinance is high, then the extent of crime and delinquency prevalence

should be low. To do this, Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient was

utilized. The null hypothesis of this study is, “There is no significant relationship

between the level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance, and

extent of crime and delinquency prevalence in the barangay” and the alternative
 30

hypothesis is “There is a significant relationship between the level of

implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and extent of crime and

delinquency prevalence in the barangay”.

As shown in Table 3, the r xy the value obtained is -0.275043799 ≈ -0.28

which denotes a weak correlation. It means that if the level of implementation of

Minor’s Safekeeping ordinance is high, then it does not affect the extent of crime

and delinquency prevalence in the barangay. Conversely, if the extent of crime

and delinquency prevalence of the respondents is high, then it is not due to the

level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance in the barangay,

because the correlation is weak.

Likewise, since the computed t-value of 0.28 is greater than the critical

value of 0.195 at the 0.05 significance level or 0.254 at 0.01 (two-tailed test) and

with the degree of freedom of 118. This means that the null hypothesis is

rejected. Therefore, there is a significant relationship between the level of

implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and the extent of crime and

delinquency prevalence in Barangay East, General Santos City.

 31

Table 3.
Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient between the Level of
Implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping and Extent of Crime and Delinquency
Prevalence of the Respondents

Tabular value Computed

Variables df Remarks
value
.05 .01
Level of
Implementation r xy =0.28 **
H 0is
VS. Extent of (significant
118 0.195 0.254 rejected.
Crime and at .05
Delinquency and .01)
Prevalence
 32

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary, findings, conclusions, and

recommendation made for this study

Summary

The researcher endeavored to find out the level of implementation of

Minor’s safekeeping Ordinance in Barangay East. General Santos City for the

year 2017 – 2018 and to answer the following questions.

1. What is the level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance

in Barangay East, General Santos City?

2. What is the extent of the crime and delinquency prevalence in the

barangay?

3. Is there a significant relationship between the level of implementation

of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and the extent of crime and

delinquency prevalence in the barangay?

The respondents of this study were the barangay officials and tanods in

Barangay East, General Santos City. The researchers used a survey

questionnaire pertains to the level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping

Ordinance and crime and delinquency prevalence in the barangay. The Weighted
 33

Mean and Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient are utilized to

interpret and analyze to answer the problems mentioned above.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of the study the following conclusions were drawn:

1. This is generally mean that the level of implementation of Minor’s

Safekeeping Ordinance in the barangay is somewhat implemented. The

barangay has highly implemented the ordinance by not allowing minors outside

of their residence or beyond their property line during the safekeeping hours

unless accompanied by his or her parents. It is followed by notifying the police,

barangay officials, barangay tanods and any social worker that a minor is in the

premises of the establishment during the safekeeping hours and refuse to leave

and the minor shall only be released to the parent, guardian or any other adult

person having custody of the minor and only after having signed and agreed

upon and abide by the conditions of penalties and interventions of this ordinance.

The barangay also highly implemented the ordinance because the parent or

guardian will be located and be notified in the shortest possible time and in case

they cannot be located, the minor will stay in the custody of the station of police

barangay captain for the maximum of three days.

2. Generally, the result implies that there is sometimes crime and

delinquency prevalence in the barangay. Particularly, the youth are often caught

in a gang war. It followed the youth also often caught violated the curfew hour.
 34

3. Based on the findings, there is a significant relationship between the

level of implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping Ordinance and extent of crime

and delinquency prevalence in Barangay East, General Santos City.

Recommendations

Based on the conclusions, the following recommendations are given:

1. Strengthen the implementation of penalties, intervention, and the

imposition of fines for parents, guardians and adult person having custody of the

minor who violated the provision of the ordinance.

2. There should be systematic procedures in doing the counseling

community service and the imposition of imprisonment.

3. The Barangay personnel Install a CCTV near the establishments and

other crime-prone area.

4. For further researchers, this study will serve as a guide to study more

about the minor’s safekeeping

 35

Appendix A

LIST OF EXPERT VALIDATORS

Name Qualification

Gemma L. Reyes BSED-Filipino

MAED- Guidance and Counseling
MAED - Filipino
RMMC- G.S.C

Cyril B. Cabucos Criminology Instructor

RMMC – G.S.C

Emir C. Bariquit Barangay Kagawad

 36

Appendix B

SUMMARY OF EXPERT VALIDATORS RATING OF THE RESEARCHERS

INSTRUMENT

Name of Validators Mean Description

Gemma L. Reyes 5.00 Excellent

Cyril B. Cabucos 5.00 Excellent

Emir C. Bariquit 4.40 Excellent

Grand Mean 4.8 Very Good

LEGEND

5.00 – 4.50 – Excellent

4.49 – 3.50 – Very Good
3.39 – 2.50 – Good
2.49 – 1.50 – Fair
 37

1.49 – 1.00 – Poor

38
39
 40

APPENDIX C

RAMON MAGSAYSAY MEMORIAL COLLEGES

Pioneer Avenue, General Santos City

January 12, 2018

____________________________

____________________________

____________________________

Dear Sir/Madam:

Greetings of a prosperous New Year!

Part of our academic requirements is to conduct a research study. Thus, we are

currently working on a research study entitled “LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION
OF MINORS SAFEKEEPING ORDINANCE CODE NO.3 IN BARANGAY EAST
GENERAL SANTOS CITY AND EXTENT OF CRIME AND DELINQUENCY
PREVALENCE”.

In this regard, we humbly ask your cooperation to answer our survey

questionnaire as a source of our data.

Your cooperation will surely be a great help to the success of this research study.

Thank you very much, and God bless.

Very Truly yours,

JEREMY JOAQUIN / GENREY B. NECOSIA

Researchers

Noted:

JOLLIVIE PADUA
Adviser

MARNIE J. BESAS, Ph.D.Crim

Criminology Program Director
 41

APPENDIX D.1

QUESTIONNAIRE

Part I: Questionnaire on the level of Implementation of Minor’s Safekeeping

Code Ordinance No.3 in Barangay EAST General Santos City

Direction: Kindly read and evaluate the items carefully to determine the level of

Implementation of Minors Safekeeping Ordinance in General Santos City.

Please indicate your answer by putting the checkmark in the questionnaire items:

Scale Interpretation Description

4 Always If the Item Describe is Very Highly Implemented

3 Sometimes If the Item Described is Highly Implemented

2 Seldom If the Item Described is implemented

1 Never If the Item is described not implemented at all

 42

Level of Implementation of Minors Safekeeping Ordinance in General

Santos City.
Indicators 4 3 2 1

1.no minors shall be outside of their residence or beyond

their property line during the safekeeping hours unless
accompanied by his or her parents.
2. Minors shall be prohibited from entering, staying or be
present in any public places or establishment during
safekeeping hours.
3. Parents of Minors, or other Adult person having the
custody of the minor, commits an offense if he/she knowingly
permits, or allow the minor to be or remain in any public
place or establishment during safekeeping hours.
4. The owner, operator, or any employee of an establishment
commits an offense if he or she knowingly allows a minor to
be present or remain in the premises of the establishment
during safekeeping hour.
5. The owner, operator, or any employee of an establishment
should immediately notify the police, barangay officials,
barangay tanods or any social worker, that a minor is in the
premises of the establishment during safekeeping hours and
refuse to leave.
6. Any minor being rescued during the safekeeping hour will
be brought to the barangay hall kababayan center or DSWD
for profiling and safekeeping.
7. Parent or guardian will be located and be notified in the
shortest time possible.
8.The minor shall only be released to the parent, guardian or
any other adult person having custody of the minor and only
after having signed and agreed upon and abide by to the
conditions of the penalties and interventions of this
ordinance.
9.In case that parents or guardian can’t be located, the minor
will stay in the custody of the station chief of police or
barangay captain for a maximum of three(3)days.
10. Penalties, intervention, and the imposition of fines for the
parent, guardian or any other adult person having custody of
the minor are Counselling, Community service,
Imprisonment.
 43

APPENDIX D.2

QUESTIONNAIRE

Part II: Questionnaire on the Extent of Crime and Delinquency Prevalence

in General Santos City

Direction: Kindly read and evaluate the items carefully to determine the Extent of

Crime and Delinquency Prevalence in General Santos City.

Please indicate your answer by putting the checkmark in the questionnaire items:

Scale Interpretation Description

4 Always If the Item Describe is Very Highly Implemented

3 Sometimes If the Item Described is Highly Implemented

2 Seldom If the Item Described is implemented

1 Never If the Item is described not implemented at all

 44

Extent of Crime and Delinquency Prevalence in General Santos City.

Indicators

1. Youth caught in some establishes committing robbery.

2. Youth caught in a gang war.

3. Youth caught because they commit motor vehicle theft.

4. Youth caught because they commit rape.

5. Youth are involved in carnapping.

6. Youth are used as a carrier of drugs.

7. Youth are involved in sexual extortion.

8. Youth caught because of violating curfew hours.

9. Youth caught bringing deadly weapons.

10. Youth caught in a riot.

 45

Appendix E

CERTIFICATE OF APPEARANCE

To whom it may concern,

This is to certify that the following students from RMMC personally

appeared in this office then gathered data with their thesis titled “LEVEL OF

IMPLEMENTATION OF MINOR’S SAFEKEEPING ORDINANCE CODE NO.3

IN BARANGAY EAST GENERAL SANTOS CITY AND EXTENT OF CRIME

DELINQUENCY PREVALENCE’ to wit;

1. Jeremy D. Joaquin
2. Genrey B. Necosia
This certification is being issued for whatever legal purpose/s it may serve

them best.

Issued this 19th day of January 2018 at Brgy East General Santos City,

Philippines

Jose Jacinto E. Dinopol

Punong barangay
 46

REFERENCES

Bochenek, (2012) https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2016/children-behind-bars.

Bruno (2018) https://www.tombruno.com/articles/crimes-committed-by-minors/.

Cabalza,(2017) http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/877478/oplan-rody-back-40-pushups
for-offenders-rounded-up-in-paranaque.

Cabildo, (2016) http://opinion.inquirer.net/95882/children-in-conflict-with-law.

Cole, (2003) https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02885695.

Doleac, (2015) https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/repealing-juvenile-curfew-

laws-could-make-cities-safer/.

Fabro,(2009)http://www.citymayors.com/society/usa-youth-curfews.html.

Fe A. BarbadoAgpaoa,(1997) : Contemporary Social Problems and Issues.

Jacobson, (1998):
https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1998/06/17/40curfew.h17.html.

Laurel, (2016 ) https://kami.com.ph/14667-metro-manila-implements-oplan-

rody.html#14667.

Lait, (1998) http://articles.latimes.com/1998/feb/10/local/me-17512.

Magher, (2015) https://www.livestrong.com/article/1003913-legal-curfew-times-

teens-los-angeles/.

Oscar Gatchalian Soriano (2010) Juvenile Delinquency and Crime Prevention

with Appendices on related Laws and Issuances.

Pringle, (2013): https://411newyork.org/guide/2009/08/14/curfews-in-new-york/

Reynolds, (1996) :https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?
ID=165846.

Root, (2016): https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/28/curfew-laws-

san-diego.

Suter, (2015) : https://hoover.org/research/crime-and-punishment-minors.

Schwartz (2016): https://youthlaw.org/publication/proliferating-curfew-laws-keep-kids-at-

home-but-fail-to-curb-juvenile-crime/.

Weigel, (2011) :https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/criminal-

justice/juvenile-curfew-laws-arrests.
 47

Wickliffe,(2018):
http://teachersinstitute.yale.edu/curriculum/units/2000/2/00.02.07. x.html
 48

CURRICULUM VITAE

JEREMY IAN D. JOAQUIN

BARANGAY CITY HEIGHTS PAPARON
09066940860
jeremyianjoaquin@gmail.com

Personal Data:

Nickname : jerjer

Age : 19 yrs. old

Birthday : January 19, 1999

Sex : Male

Civil Status : Single

Height : 164(cm)

Weight : 77 (kg)

Citizenship : Filipino

Father : Ryan V. Joaquin

Mother : Michelle D. Joaquin

Special Skills:

Basketball, Baseball, Driving

Educational Background:

Tertiary : Bachelor of Science in Criminology

Ramon Magsaysay Memorial College
General Santos City
 49

2017 – 2018

Secondary: Lagao National High School San Isidro, General

Santos City
2014 – 2015
Primary: Dadiangas Heights Elementary School City
Heights, General Santos City
2011- 2012
Seminars, Training, and Convention Attended

2016 : RMMCPAF-ROTC EDUCATIONAL TOUR 2016

Held on February 27, 2016
At the Tactical Operation Group XII 7th Air
Reserve Center
Sasa, Davao City

: Basic Air Force Reserve Training Course AFROTC

Grad
Held on March 20, 2016
At Venue 88 Convention Center, Mabuhay Road
Brgy. San Isidro, General Santos City

:1.3- Kilometer Open Sea Survival Swimming

Held on October 9, 2016
At Ladol Beach, Alabel, Sarangani Province

2017 : Markmanship and Combat Shooting

Held on March 11, 2017
At Rajah Muda Firing Range
Buayan, Alabel, Sarangani Province

2018 : Gender and Development Symposium

Held on March 8-9, 2018
At Adventist Convention and Media Center Southern
Mindanao Mission Compound, G.S.C
 50

CURRICULUM VITAE

GENREY B. NECOSIA
Balangonan Jose Abad Santos Davao Occidental
09264105742

Personal Data:

Nickname : jay-r

Age : 20

Birthday : August 23, 1998

Sex : Male

Civil Status : Single

Height : 5’6

Weight : 58kg

Citizenship : Filipino

Father : Ray A. Necosia

Mother : Jenelyn S. Necosia

Special Skills:

Basketball, Volleyball, Billiard

Educational Background:

Tertiary: Bachelor of Science in Criminology

Ramon Magsaysay Memorial College
General Santos City
2017 – 2018
 51

Secondary: Balangonan National High School Jose Abad Santos

Davao Santos Occidental
2014 – 2015

Primary: Balangonan Elemenatry School Jose Abad Santos

Davao Santos Occidental
2011 – 2012

Seminars, Training, and Convention Attended

2016 : RMMCPAF-ROTC EDUCATIONAL TOUR 2016

Held on February 27, 2016, At the Tactical Operation
Group XII 7th Air Reserve Center
Sasa, Davao City

: Basic Air Force Reserve Training Course AFROTC

Grad
Held on March 20, 2016
At Venue 88 Convention Center, Mabuhay Road,
Brgy. San Isidro, General Santos City

: 1.3- Kilometer Open Sea Survival Swimming

Held on October 9, 2016
At Ladol Beach, Alabel, Sarangani Province

2017 : Markmanship and Combat Shooting

Held on March 11, 2017
At Rajah Muda Firing Range
Buayan, Alabel, Sarangani Province

2018 : Gender and Development Symposium

Held on March 8-9, 2018
At Adventist Convention and Media Center Southern
Mindanao Mission Compound, G.S.C