The past week has been one of the darkest for our schools in recent memory. In a span of six days, the country witnessed what may be the most violent string of school-related incidents.

On 22 June, two minors, ages 14 and 15, opened fire inside a public high school in Tacloban City, killing three students and injuring at least 20 others. In the days that followed, separate stabbing incidents involving students were reported in Negros Occidental and Cavite.

These came on the heels of the tragic drowning of two Ateneo basketball players in Aurora.

Different incidents, different circumstances, but all involving children and institutions meant to protect them. The truth is that our schools are no longer dealing only with academic challenges. They are increasingly being tested by violence, trauma and the failure of systems designed to keep students safe.

Under Republic Act 9344, or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act, as amended by Republic Act 10630, a child 15 years old or younger is exempt from criminal liability unless it is shown that he or she acted with discernment.

Those older than 15 but younger than 18 are also treated differently, with diversion and rehabilitation being the preferred approach.

The law was crafted with compassion, recognizing that children are not yet fully formed and that mistakes made in youth should not always carry the same weight as those committed by adults.

In the Tacloban shooting, one suspect may face criminal charges because he is 15 and may have acted with discernment. The younger suspect, being 14, may evade criminal prosecution altogether.

This has again revived proposals in Congress to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility, a measure that has long divided lawmakers, child advocates and law enforcers.

Other jurisdictions have taken a different path. In the United States, the minimum age varies by state, but some allow prosecution of minors as young as 10. Singapore sets the minimum age at 10, supported by a strict but structured juvenile rehabilitation system. The Philippines, by comparison, remains firmly at 15.

The issue, however, is not as simple as lowering the age by legislation. We must ask whether our own penal system is ready. Can our juvenile detention centers handle younger offenders? Can our correctional facilities rehabilitate them without exposing them to hardened criminal influence?

If the answer is no, then lowering the age without upgrading the system may only worsen the problem and create a cycle of criminality at an even younger age.

This past week has become a test for our educational system in ways we never imagined. Security measures may catch knives and guns, but they cannot detect trauma, anger or hopelessness.

Those are battles fought long before violence erupts. If we are to protect our children, accountability must extend beyond the child who commits the act. It must also reach the homes, schools and institutions that failed to see the warning signs.

For comments, email him at darren.dejesus@gmail.com.