Short answer. Suspended. The court still hears the evidence and, if it finds the child committed the acts, fixes the imposable penalty and any civil liability — but instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction it suspends all further proceedings and commits the child to care rather than to prison.
What the law says
the court shall determine the imposable penalty, including any civil liability chargeable against him
RA 7610, Section 25 — Children Arrested In Conflict. Read the full provision →
What the law says
instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, the court shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such child to the custody or care of the Department of Social Welfare and Development or to any training institution operated by the Government, or duly-licensed agencies or any other responsible person
RA 7610, Section 25 — Children Arrested In Conflict. Read the full provision →
The case is heard, not waived
This is not a dismissal, and the distinction matters to everyone involved. The court hears the evidence in the proper proceedings and decides whether the child committed the acts charged. If it finds that he did, the court shall determine the imposable penalty, including any civil liability chargeable against him. So the facts are tried, a penalty is quantified, and any liability to those harmed is fixed. What follows is a decision about what to do with a child against whom those findings have been made — not a conclusion that nothing happened.
What the court withholds
instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, the court shall suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such child to the custody or care of the Department of Social Welfare and Development or to any training institution operated by the Government, or duly-licensed agencies or any other responsible person. The step withheld is the judgment of conviction itself — the thing that would otherwise become a criminal record and start a sentence. The commitment that replaces it is custodial in a different sense: care and supervision, in the hands of a welfare agency or a named responsible person rather than a penal institution.
How long the commitment runs, and who reviews it
The section sets an outer limit of the child reaching eighteen years of age, but expressly allows a shorter period as the court may deem proper after considering the reports and recommendations of the DSWD, or of the agency or responsible individual under whose care he has been committed. Throughout, the child is subject to visitation and supervision by a representative of the DSWD or a duly-licensed agency, or such other officer as the court designates, on the conditions the court prescribes. The arrangement is therefore reviewable rather than fixed, and the reports of the caring agency are what drive any shortening of it.
There is still an appeal, and a later law
A child whose sentence is suspended can appeal from the order of the court in the same manner as appeals in criminal cases. That is worth noting precisely because no conviction was pronounced — the section does not treat the suspension as a favour placing the outcome beyond challenge. Bear in mind too that this provision dates from 1992 and that children in conflict with the law are now governed generally by Republic Act No. 9344, the juvenile justice legislation, which sets the age of criminal responsibility and its own rules on diversion and suspended sentence. Check the mechanics there before relying on the periods stated here.
Related provisions
- RA 7610, Section 22 — Children As Zones Of Peace
- RA 7610, Section 25 — Children Arrested In Conflict