Peoples Empowerment against Crime through Education: A Framework for an Enhanced Crime Prevention Program
Liezel Baclig – Franco, PhD
Laguna State Polytechnic University- Sta. Cruz Main Campus, Philippines
The success of any crime prevention program depends on the extent to which the public is aware of the magnitude and threat of crime, and their understanding and acceptance of methods to prevent it. Crime prevention services will take a little value unless the public is aware of the programs, understands their benefits and takes action. (Virginia Dept of Criminal Justice Services, 1988)
The purpose of the study is to assess the level of awareness on crime of the Barangay officials and community in Brgy. Bubukal Sta Cruz, Laguna and the methods used in the delivery of information in order to create a proposed action plan that will help to enhance the crime prevention program.
In the findings of the study, the Barangay officials and the community of the Brgy. Bubukal Sta Cruz, Laguna are not fully aware on the different crimes, specifically, crimes stated in the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines. In addition, the delivery of information needs to strengthen to provide more awareness to the public. A proposed action plan was formulated for the possible extension project of the College of Criminal Justice Education in the community of Brgy. Bubukal Sta Cruz, Laguna.
The key findings from the focus-group discussions show that the crime such as Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations; Crimes Against Public Order; and Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State; are the least aware of both group. In the delivery of Information discussed that limited access to seminars and training on crime awareness and crime prevention program and rarely conduct Focal Group Discussions.
Keywords: Crime, Crime Awareness, Crime Prevention Program, Delivery of Information
“Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance therewith”, stated in Art. 3 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. It was clearly stipulated that no one was exempted to the law which means that people cannot defend their actions by claiming they did not know and through awareness it is necessary to empower and educate the people about their rights as well as their responsibilities. Awareness is the accumulation of everything you have learned in life, and the best way to improve awareness is by adding new information to your understanding. In ACT No. 3815 or shall be known as “Revised Penal Code” it classifies crimes into different titles which help create better understanding to the community.
The focus of crime awareness is on strengthening community through education, knowledge and also services that build connections between community members and connect them to external resources that can help them combat crime. Knowing something early about crime, preferably before the occurrence strikes most people as a logical approach to crime prevention. The twin challenges, of course, are to identify exactly what it is in individuals, families, and communities that increases the odds of involvement in crime and then to do something useful about the identified conditions as early as possible (Homel and Thomsen, 2017). Apparently, in the study of Chainey and Ratcliffe, (2005) they distinguish between the terms ‘community safety’ and ‘crime prevention’. It mentioned that “Community safety provides a strategic viewpoint on community harms by focusing attention towards the development of programmes that set targets to manage risks and aims to maximize public safety” and “Crime prevention involves any activity by an individual or group, public or private, which attempts to eliminate crime prior to it occurring or before any additional activity results”. In addition, according to Professor Paul Ekblom (2011) there is a 5I’s crime problem-solving methodology. First, Intelligence refers on the gathering and analyzing information of crime, its causation, problems and consequences. Second, the Intervention covers on the blocking, disrupting or weakening those causes of crime. Third, Implementation is the adapting of the intervention principles into practical methods which tailored for the local problem and context. Forth, Involvement which is mobilizing other agencies and individuals to perform their part in implementing the intervention, or acting as partnership. And finally, Impact refers to the nature of evaluation or the learning points whether positive or negative effects.
As we all know, crime can be happened to anyone, anywhere, and anytime. Even in the amidst of this pandemic, crime still exists and continue. Meanwhile, the Philippine National Police (Crime Information Reporting and Analysis System) in the First Quarter of 2022, released the Nationwide Crime Statistics that there was already 84, 588 reported crime incidents and the Region 4A where Laguna was part of, was in second of the highest reported crime incident with 12, 631. Based on the statistical data, crime rate in the province of Laguna is quite high and disturbing. “Crime Prevention comprises strategies and measures that seek to reduce the risk of crimes occurring, and their potential harmful effects on individuals and society, including fear of crime, by intervening to influence their multiple causes. (Guidelines for the Prevention of Crime ECOSOC Resolution 2002/13).
The main focus of the study is to assess the level of awareness on crime of the barangay officials and community in Brgy. Bubukal Sta Cruz, Laguna and the methods used in the delivery of information in order to create a proposed action plan that will help to enhance the crime prevention program. Specifically, the study will seek to determine the following:
Level of awareness of the barangay officials and the community on crimes in terms of:
This research utilized the descriptive survey method. The descriptive research method was used to determine the level of awareness on crimes of the barangay officials and the community in Brgy. Bubukal Sta Cruz, Laguna and assessed the methods used in the delivery of information. A survey questionnaire was utilized via Google Form and used as the main gathering data instrument. The questionnaire composed of two parts, the first part was to assess the level of crime awareness of the respondents and the second part was to evaluate the methods used in the delivery of information.
In answering the objective raised in the study the researcher utilized different statistical treatment which was used to facilitate the description of important features of data. Percentage, weighted mean, standard deviation, T-Test and Pearson R was used.
Figure 1, 2, and 3 show the demographic profile of respondents.
Figure 1 :- Respondents Category Profile
It can be seen from the above figure that 41 or 13.23 percent of the respondents were Barangay Officials and 269 or 86.77 percent were the community of the Brgy. Bubukal, Sta. Cruz, Laguna.
Figure 2 :- Respondents Sex Profile
It can be gleaned from the above figure that 128 or 41.29 percent of the respondents are male and 182 or 58.71 percent are female.
Figure 3 :- Respondents Civil Status
It can be seen from the above figure that 228 or 73.54 percent of the respondents were single, 72 or 23.22 percent were married, 6 were widow or 1.95 percent, and only 4 or 1.29 percent were separated. It may be noted that majority of the respondents were single.
The next tables represent the results of the study and discusses the implications of these findings to the current state of knowledge on the topic of the study.
Table 1. Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nation
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1) Conspiracy to commit treason. | 2.67 | Aware | 1.25 | 2.76 | Aware | 0.79 |
| 2) Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas. | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 2.96 | Aware | 0.83 |
| 3) Action that commits espionage. | 2.00 | Less Aware | 0.82 | 2.65 | Aware | 0.84 |
| 4) Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals. | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 2.62 | Aware | 0.85 |
| 5) Violation of neutrality if the information given might be useful to the enemy. | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 2.63 | Aware | 0.88 |
| TOTAL | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.97 | 2.67 | Aware | 0.84 |
As shown in Table 1, both Barangay officials and community assessed the indicator “conspiracy to commit treason,” as Aware (2.67 and 2.76). In indicators, “piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas”,” actions that commits espionage”, “inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals”, and “violation of neutrality if the information given might be useful to the enemy,” the Barangay officials gave an assessment of Less Aware (2.33, 2.00, 2.33 and 2.33), while the community gave Aware assessment (2.96, 2.65, 2.62, 2.63).
In totality, the Barangay officials gave a “Less Aware” (AWM = 2.33) and an “Aware” (AWM = 2.67) assessments was given by the community as regards to Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title One, this chapter explores crimes against the nation, such as treason, piracy, sabotage, and espionage. In the study of Foster (2009), he mentioned in the case of Pennsylvania v. Nelson, that the government is tasked with keeping the nation safe from domestic and international attacks on the government and citizens. In which he added that the national security is an issue that affects the entire country.
Table 2. Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1) Actions that commit Arbitrary Detention | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 3.01 | Aware | 0.76 |
| 2) Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 2.84 | Aware | 0.85 |
| 3) Violation of domicile | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 2.81 | Aware | 0.81 |
| 4) Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.94 | 2.88 | Aware | 0.87 |
| 5) Interruption of religious worship | 2.67 | Aware | 1.25 | 2.81 | Aware | 0.81 |
| TOTAL | 2.40 | Less Aware | 1.00 | 2.87 | Aware | 0.82 |
It can be seen in Table 2; the Barangay officials gave an assessment of “Less Aware” in four indicators; “actions that commit arbitrary detention” (2.33), “delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities” (2.33), “violation of domicile” (2.33), and” search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse” (2.33), except on the indicator “interruption of religious worship” with an assessment of “Aware” (2.67). It can be noted that the community rated all of the indicators as “Aware” (3.01, 2.84, 2.81, 2.88 and 2.81).
In sum, the Barangay officials gave a “Less Aware” (AWM = 2.40) and an “Aware” (AWM = 2.87) assessments was given by the community as regards to Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Two, this chapter explores crimes such as Arbitrary Detention or Expulsion, Violation of Domicile, and Crimes Against Religious Worship. The primary offender herein is a public officer acting under supposed exercise of official functions and duties, although illegally, except for the offense of offending the religious feelings. It is in the Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which provides that “everyone has the right to liberty and security of person and no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. In case of People vs. Reyes, the Chief of Police had directed the speaker in a public meeting of the Iglesias ni Cristo, who was then attacking the Catholic and Aglipayan churches, to stop the latter’s speech. This Chief of Police, thereupon, fired two shots in the air which had caused the dispersal of the crowd in which clearly liable under Article 131 of the Revised Penal Code.
Table 3. Crimes Against Public Order
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1) Promotes, maintains, or commits Rebellion or insurrection | 3.00 | Aware | 0.00 | 2.76 | Aware | 0.79 |
| 2) Leads or in any manner, directs, commands and participate on Coup d’état | 3.33 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.58 | Less Aware | 0.82 |
| 3) Tumultuous disturbance or interruption liable to cause disturbance | 3.00 | Aware | 0.00 | 2.73 | Aware | 0.84 |
| 4) Conspiracy and inciting to commit sedition | 3.33 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.69 | Aware | 0.86 |
| 5) Actions causing alarms and scandals | 3.00 | Aware | 0.00 | 2.83 | Aware | 0.82 |
| TOTAL | 3.13 | Aware | 0.19 | 2.72 | Aware | 0.83 |
As depicted in Table 3, both Barangay Officials and Community gave an assessment of “Aware” in four indicators; “promotes, maintains, or commits rebellion or insurrection” (3.00, 2.76), “tumultuous disturbance or interruption liable to cause disturbance” (3.00, 2.73), “conspiracy and inciting to commit sedition” (3.33, 2.69) and “actions causing alarms and scandals” (3.00, 2.83). Only in the indicator “leads or in any manner, directs, commands and participate on Coup d’état”, an “Aware” assessment was given by the Barangay officials (3.33) while community gave “Less Aware” (2.58).
Overall, the two groups of respondents gave an “Aware” (AWM = 3.13 and 2.72) assessments as regards to Crimes Against Public Order.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Three, this chapter explores crimes such as rebellion, sedition, and disloyalty. Crimes against public order are those that are considered to be disruptive to the normal function of government. It may usually involve illegal activities that affect other people or groups. However, these criminal acts may also be carried out in an effort to make a political statement or to create chaos among the general population. It may include inciting a riot in a public area. Some of these crimes may be considered violent acts because it involves injury to someone else or damage to property. It tends to disrupt or disturb the peace of the general public or to offend the state itself. (RALB Law Articles)
Table 4. Crimes Against Public Interest
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1) Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive. | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.83 | Aware | 0.89 |
| 2) Making and importing and uttering false coins | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.79 | Aware | 0.83 |
| 3) Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents | 3.33 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.91 | Aware | 0.83 |
| 4) False Testimony | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.87 | Aware | 0.88 |
| 5) Using fictitious name and concealing true name | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.83 | Aware | 0.90 |
| TOTAL | 2.93 | Aware | 0.61 | 2.84 | Aware | 0.87 |
It can be observed in Table 4, that the two groups of respondents gave an assessment of “Aware” in all of the indicators; “counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive” (2.67, 2.83), “making and importing and uttering false coins” (3.00, 2.79), “forging treasury or bank notes on other documents” (3.33, 2.91), “false testimony” (2.67, 2.87) and “using fictitious name and concealing true name” (3.00, 2.83).
In general, the two groups of respondents gave an “Aware” assessment as regards to Crimes Against Public Interest as seen in their respective average weighted means of 2.93 and 2.84.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Four, this chapter covers forgeries, counterfeiting coins, falsification of legislative, public, commercial, and private documents, false testimony, and fraud. In the study of Vithlani (1998), industry world-wide loses large amounts to counterfeiters. The ultimate victims of unfair competition are the consumers they receive poor-quality goods at an excessive price. Governments lose out on unpaid tax and incur large costs in enforcing intellectual property rights. Moreover, the article of Atty. Jose C. Sison in regards to controversy on the nursing exam leakage. It involves the supposed activities of a syndicate which assists young college graduates in procuring licenses for the practice of their profession without really sweating it out. More disgusting here is that the people behind such an activity is a public officers or employees, or any office for that matter, who shall falsify a public and official document by taking advantage of their official position. (PhilStar Global, 2006)
Table 5. Crimes Relative to Opium and other Prohibited Drugs
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1) Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.47 | 2.76 | Aware | 0.90 |
| 2) Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.75 | Aware | 0.90 |
| 3) Possession of Dangerous Drugs | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.88 | Aware | 0.95 |
| 4) Use of Dangerous Drugs | 2.67 | Aware | 0.94 | 2.90 | Aware | 0.89 |
| 5) Maintenance of a Drug Den, Dive or Resort | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.69 | Aware | 0.96 |
| TOTAL | 2.67 | Aware | 0.63 | 2.80 | Aware | 0.92 |
As depicted in Table 5, both Barangay Officials and Community gave an assessment of “Aware” in four indicators; “manufacture of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals” (2.67, 2.75), “possession of dangerous drugs” (3.00, 2.88), “use of dangerous drugs “(2.67, 2.90), and “maintenance of a drug den, dive or resort” (2.67, 2.69). Consequently, a “Less Aware” (2.33) assessment was given by the Barangay officials and “Aware” (2.76) assessment was given by the community to the indicator “importation of dangerous drugs and/or controlled precursors and essential chemicals”.
In totality, the Barangay officials and community gave an “Aware” (AWM = 2.67, 2.80) assessments as regards to Crimes Relative to Opium and other Prohibited Drugs.
Based on RA 9165, Sec. 2, it is the policy of the State to safeguard the integrity of its territory and the well-being of its citizenry particularly the youth, from the harmful effects of dangerous drugs on their physical and mental well-being, and to defend the same against acts or omissions detrimental to their development and preservation. Supported by the Global Assessment Programme on Drug Abuse (2003) assessments should be undertaken in a comprehensive, systematic and periodic manner, drawing on results of relevant studies, allowing for geographical considerations and using similar definitions, indicators and procedures to assess the drug situation.
Table 6. Crimes Against Public Morals
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1) Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions and indecent shows | 3.67 | Fully Aware | 0.47 | 2.82 | Aware | 0.83 |
| 2) Prostitution | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.91 | Aware | 0.88 |
| 3) Gambling and Betting | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.90 | Aware | 0.90 |
| 4) Illegal Cockfighting | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.92 | Aware | 0.85 |
| 5) Grave Scandal | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.88 | Aware | 0.86 |
| TOTAL | 3.00 | Aware | 0.61 | 2.89 | Aware | 0.86 |
It can be seen in Table 6, both Barangay Officials and Community gave an assessment of “Aware” in four indicators; “prostitution” (2.67, 2.91), “gambling and betting “(3.00, 2.90), “illegal cockfighting” (2.67, 2.92), and “grave scandal” (3.00, 2.88). Moreover, a “Fully Aware” (3.67) assessment was given by the Barangay officials and “Aware” (2.82) assessment was given by the community to the indicator “immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions and indecent shows”.
In sum, the Barangay officials and community gave an “Aware” (AWM = 3.00, 2.88) assessments as regards to Crimes Against Public Morals.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Six, this chapter explores gambling and betting, offenses against decency and good customs, and vagrants and prostitutes. Morality does not necessarily coincide with the law, but it contributes to it. An act may be legal but nevertheless considered to be immoral in a particular society. It describes certain acts as offensive to the sensibilities of the general populace. (Carpenter & Hayes, 2007). Moreover, to approach children in prostitution as a trade issue is important because it is not just the individual child who is involve in prostitution but also their families who rely on their earnings. (Arcillia, 2001)
Table 7. Crimes Committed by Public Officers
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1. Corruption of Public Officials | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.97 | Aware | 0.80 |
| 2. Bribery | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.88 | Aware | 0.86 |
| 3. Frauds and Illegal Exactions and Transactions | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.47 | 2.90 | Aware | 0.90 |
| 4. Malversation of Public Funds or Property | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.85 | Aware | 0.81 |
| 5. Knowingly Rendering Unjust Judgment | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.78 | Aware | 0.84 |
| TOTAL | 2.80 | Aware | 0.68 | 2.87 | Aware | 0.84 |
As shown in Table 7, both Barangay officials and community assessed the indicators, “corruption of public officials” (3.00 and 2.97), “bribery “(3.00 and 2.88), “malversation of public funds or property” (2.67 and 2.85) and “knowingly rendering unjust judgment” (3.00 and 2.78) as “Aware”. While in indicator, “frauds and illegal exactions and transactions” the Barangay officials gave an assessment of Less Aware (2.33) while the community gave Aware assessment (2.90).
In general, the Barangay officials and the community gave an “Aware” assessment (AWM = 2.80, 2.87) as regards to Crimes Committed by Public Officers.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Seven, this chapter explores crimes committed by Public Officers which involves corruptions, dereliction of duty, bribery, frauds and illegal exactions and transactions, and malversation of public funds or property and other offenses or irregularities by public officers. In the study of Dimant and Tosato (2017), corruption has fierce impacts on economic and societal development and is subject to a vast range of institutional, jurisdictional, societal, and economic conditions. Supported by Nawaz and Bridi (2008), found that corruption is a significant obstacle to a good governance in the Philippines. All levels of corruption, from petty bribery to grand corruption, patronage and state capture, exist in the Philippines at a considerable scale and scope. Significant efforts have been made to combat corruption, which include putting in place legal and institutional frameworks, as well as efforts by civil society organizations and the media.
Table 8. Crimes Against Person
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1. Parricide/Infanticide | 3.33 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.88 | Aware | 0.86 |
| 2. Homicide o Murder | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 3.06 | Aware | 0.87 |
| 3. Abortion | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 3.09 | Aware | 0.83 |
| 4. Duel | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.85 | Aware | 0.79 |
| 5. Physical Injuries | 2.33 | Less Aware | 0.47 | 3.10 | Aware | 0.78 |
| TOTAL | 2.93 | Aware | 0.68 | 3.00 | Aware | 0.82 |
As depicted in Table 8, both Barangay Officials and Community gave an assessment of “Aware” in four indicators; “Parricide/Infanticide” (3.33, 2.88), “Homicide o Murder” (3.00, 3.06), “Abortion” (3.00, 3.09) and “Duel” (3.00, 2.85). Only in the indicator “Physical Injuries”, an “Less Aware” assessment was given by the Barangay officials (2.33) while community gave “Aware” (3.10).
Overall, the two groups of respondents gave an “Aware” (AWM = 2.93 and 3.00) assessments as regards to Crimes Against Person.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Eight, this chapter explores destruction of life and physical injuries. Crime against the person, often simply referred to as crimes against humanity, which do not need to target a specific group. Instead, the victim of the attack can be any civilian population, regardless of its affiliation or identity. (Schabas, 2012)
Table 9. Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
| 1. Illegal Detention | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.96 | Aware | 0.85 |
| 2. Kidnapping of Minors | 3.33 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.92 | Aware | 0.75 |
| 3. Slavery | 3.00 | Aware | 0.00 | 2.94 | Aware | 0.88 |
| 4. Exploitation of Child Labor | 3.00 | Aware | 0.00 | 2.94 | Aware | 0.78 |
| 5. Services Rendered Under Compulsion in Payment of Debts | 2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.79 | Aware | 0.83 |
| TOTAL | 2.93 | Aware | 0.28 | 2.91 | Aware | 0.82 |
It can be observed in Table 9, that the two groups of respondents gave an assessment of “Aware” in all of the indicators; “illegal detention” (2.67, 2.96), “kidnapping of minors” (3.33, 2.92), “slavery” (3.00, 2.94), “exploitation of child labor” (3.00, 2.94) and “services rendered under compulsion in payment of debts” (2.67, 2.79).
Generally, the two groups of respondents gave an “Aware” assessment as regards to Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security as seen in their respective average weighted means of 2.93 and 2.91.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Nine, this chapter covers illegal detention, kidnapping of minors, slavery and servitude. In the article of Queiroz (2018) the ‘people as a sovereign body’ serves to protect against violations of individual liberty and despotic power. Where no such common body exists, individuals are deprived of this protection. Moreover, in the case of People v. Fabro (2017) the curtailment of the victim’s liberty needs not involve any physical restraint upon the victim’s person, for the kidnapping to exist, it is not necessary that the offender kept the victim in an enclosure or treated harshly.
Table 10. Crimes Against Property
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
|
3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 3.03 | Aware | 0.85 |
|
2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.74 | Aware | 0.81 |
|
3.33 | Aware | 0.47 | 3.09 | Aware | 0.79 |
|
3.00 | Aware | 0.00 | 3.02 | Aware | 0.86 |
|
2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 2.80 | Aware | 0.85 |
| TOTAL | 2.93 | Aware | 0.45 | 2.94 | Aware | 0.83 |
As shown in Table 10, the Barangay officials and the community gave an assessment of “Aware” in all of the indicators; “robbery” (3.00, 3.03), “brigandage” (2.67, 2.74), “theft” (3.33, 3.09), “arson and other crimes involving destruction” (3.00, 3.02) and “swindling and other deceits” (2.67, 2.80).
In totality, the two groups of respondents gave an “Aware” assessment as regards to Crimes Against Property as seen in their respective average weighted means of 2.93 and 2.94.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Ten, this chapter covers the different crimes against property which are usually motivated by financial gain. These inequalities in resources, opportunities, power and access to social status rewards create alienation and frustration, and develop into pockets or subcultures of violence, which lead to crime. (Leones, 2006). Based on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program (2002) as reported in Crime in the United States, thefts known as property crimes include “the offenses of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.” While in 2020, the index crime of theft recorded the highest number of crime cases against properties in the Philippines. During this year, theft cases amounted to around 11.6 thousand. (Statista Research Department, 2021)
Table 11. Crimes Against Chastity
| Indicators | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |
|
2.67 | Aware | 0.47 | 3.06 | Aware | 0.83 |
|
3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 3.19 | Aware | 0.87 |
|
3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.27 | Aware | 0.77 |
|
3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.99 | Aware | 0.81 |
|
3.00 | Aware | 0.82 | 2.94 | Aware | 0.83 |
| TOTAL | 2.93 | Aware | 0.75 | 3.03 | Aware | 0.82 |
As depicted in Table 11, both Barangay Officials and Community gave an assessment of “Aware” in all indicators; “adultery or concubinage” (2.67, 3.06), “rape” (3.00, 3.19), “corruption of minors” (3.00, 2.27), “acts of lasciviousness” (3.00, 2.99) and “seduction” (3.00, 2.94).Overall, the two groups of respondents gave an “Aware” (AWM = 2.93, 3.03) assessments as regards to Crimes Against Chastity.
In Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code, Title Eleven, this chapter are referred to as sexual infidelity in the Family Code or marital infidelity in a general sense. In the study of Ehsanpour and Haghighi (2021) stated that victims of these crimes are faced with more problems such as frequent victimization, future victimization, mental and physical diseases. Determining the position of the victim as the first step in achieving his rights and restoring and fixing his position in the criminal justice system will play a significant role.
Table 12. Summary of Findings on the Level of Awareness on Crimes
| Level of Awareness on Crimes | Barangay Officials | Community | ||||
| Mean | VI | Rank | Mean | VI | Rank | |
| Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations | 2.33 | Less Aware | 7 | 2.67 | Aware | 10 |
| Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State | 2.40 | Less Aware | 6 | 2.87 | Aware | 6 |
| Crimes Against Public Order | 3.13 | Aware | 1 | 2.72 | Aware | 9 |
| Crimes Against Public Interest | 2.93 | Aware | 3 | 2.84 | Aware | 7 |
| Crimes Relative to Opium and other Prohibited Drugs | 2.67 | Aware | 5 | 2.80 | Aware | 8 |
| Crimes Against Public Morals | 3.00 | Aware | 2 | 2.89 | Aware | 5 |
| Crimes Committed by Public Officers | 2.80 | Aware | 4 | 2.87 | Aware | 6 |
| Crimes Against Person | 2.93 | Aware | 3 | 3.00 | Aware | 2 |
| Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security | 2.93 | Aware | 3 | 2.91 | Aware | 4 |
| Crimes Against Property | 2.93 | Aware | 3 | 2.94 | Aware | 3 |
| Crimes Against Chastity | 2.93 | Aware | 3 | 3.03 | Aware | 1 |
| Average Weighted Mean | 2.82 | Aware | 2.87 | Aware | ||
It can be observed in Table 12, the summary of findings on the Level of Awareness on Crimes as assessed by the Barangay officials and the community of Barangay Bubukal, Sta. Cruz, Laguna. The data revealed that the Barangay official highest aware crime was Crimes Against Public Order and the least aware was Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations. Whereas, the community highest aware crime was Crimes Against Chastity and the least aware was Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations. This means that crimes with least awareness should be improved to be Fully Aware.
Crime prevention services such as Neighborhood Watch, Operation Identification, security inspections of homes and businesses and others are of little value unless the public is aware of the programs, understands their benefits and takes action. (Virginia Dept of Criminal Justice Services, 1988)
Table 13. Delivery of Information
| Delivery of Information | Barangay Officials | Rank | Community | Rank | ||||
| Mean | VI | SD | Mean | VI | SD | |||
| 1. Provide seminars and training on crime awareness and crime prevention program. | 2.67 | Often | 0.47 | 3 | 2.99 | Often | 0.84 | 4 |
| 2. Implementation of Barangay Ordinances/ Policy with regards to crime awareness and crime prevention program. | 3.00 | Often | 0.82 | 2 | 3.02 | Often | 0.75 | 3 |
| 3. Availability of Instruction, Education and Communication Materials for crime awareness and prevention program. | 3.33 | Often | 0.47 | 1 | 3.03 | Often | 0.76 | 2 |
| 4. Conduct Focal Group Discussions in crime awareness and prevention program. | 3.33 | Often | 0.47 | 1 | 2.89 | Often | 0.81 | 5 |
| 5. Promotes on Multi Media flatform the programs for crime awareness and crime preventions. | 3.33 | Often | 0.47 | 1 | 3.08 | Often | 0.78 | 1 |
| TOTAL | 3.13 | Often | 0.54 | 3.00 | Often | 0.79 | ||
As depicted in Table 13, both Barangay Officials and Community gave an assessment of “Often” in all indicators; “Provide seminars and training on crime awareness and crime prevention program” (2.67, 2.99), “Implementation of Barangay Ordinances/ Policy with regards to crime awareness and crime prevention program.” (3.00, 3.02), “Availability of Instruction, Education and Communication Materials for crime awareness and prevention program” (3.33, 3.03) and “Conduct Focal Group Discussions in crime awareness and prevention program” (3.33, 2.89) and “Promotes on Multi Media flatform the programs for crime awareness and crime preventions” (3.33, 3.08).
Overall, the two groups of respondents gave an “Often” (AWM = 3.13 and 3.00) assessments as regards to the Delivery of Information.
In order to disrupt offending and hence prevent crimes, it is critical to consider the mechanisms through which they occur. One of the successful approaches adopted in crime prevention revolves around the removal of opportunities through the implementation of changes in the physical environment. (Bowler & Johnson, 2003) Moreover, the study of Bhatnagar (2014), improving governance through the use of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the delivery of services to the poor, i.e., improving efficiency, accountability, and transparency. Supported by, Kirkham (1994) stated that more effective information systems are designed when some time is spent at the beginning of the analysis exploring the environment in which the system will operate.
Table 14. :- Results of Independent T-Test on the Difference of the Respondents in the Level of Crime Awareness
| Groups | Mean | t-stat | p-value | Decision Rule | Interpretation | |
| Comp. | Crit. | |||||
| Barangay Officials | 2.818 | 0.128 | 4.30 | 0.909 | Accept Ho | Not Significant |
| Community | 2.866 | |||||
The observed p-value of 0.909, which is greater than the hypothesized level of significance of 0.05 implies that there were no significant differences in the mean assessment ratings of the two groups of respondents. Thus, the null hypothesis that there are no significant differences on the assessments of the two groups of respondents on the level of crime awareness was accepted.
Table 15. Results of Pearson R on the Relationship between the Level of Crime Awareness and the Delivery of Information
| Variables | R-value | p-value | Strength of Correlation | Decision Rule | Interpretation |
| Level of Crime Awareness | 0.445 | 0.001 | Positive moderate correlation | Rejected | Significant |
| Delivery of Information |
The observed p-value of 0.001 and the r-value of 0.445 implies that the strength of correlation of the two variables were Positive Moderate Correlation. Thus, the null hypothesis that there is significant relationship between the level of crime awareness and the delivery of information on the Peoples Empowerment Against Crime was rejected.
Focal Group Discussion Report
The Focal Group Discussion (FGD) Report is based on findings from the two focal group discussion with over 38 Barangay Officials and 180 Community of Barangay Bubukal Sta Cruz, Laguna. The discussions were conducted to better understand the findings derived from the analysis of the completed result of the first research instrument used. The FGDs were conducted in sectors were specifically identified by the analysis. The participants in the discussions were from 2 specific groups, namely: (First group) Barangay Tanods/Lupon ng Barangay, (Second group) Samahan ng Kababaihan at Kabataan.
The report informs the “Peoples Empowerment Against Crime through Education: A Framework for an Enhanced Crime Prevention Program” to highlight and provide valuable information that will enable to design and implement more impact and demand-oriented development interventions.
The key findings from the focus-group discussions show that the crime such as Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations; Crimes Against Public Order; Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State; and Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State are the least aware of both group. In the delivery of Information discussed that limited access to seminars and training on crime awareness and crime prevention program and rarely conduct Focal Group Discussions.
Crimes Against National Security and Law of Nations:
“When the police arrested Chinese national Deng Yuanqing along with two Filipinos under suspicions of spying for the People’s Republic of China. His group was accused of mapping critical infrastructure in the Philippines was considered an act of espionage.” FGD participants – Lupon ng Barangay
Crimes Against Public Order
“The actions which making loud noises, disturbing public peace and making a scandal in public was frequently committed by youth especially during night time.” FGD participants – Barangay Tanod
Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State
“Without proper judicial authorization enters a property against the owner’s will or refuses to leave after surreptitiously entering was sometimes violated by the Barangay officials.” FGD participants – Samahan ng Kababaihan
Delivery of Information
“Regular seminars and training for crime awareness to be utilized through Focal Group Discussion and series of workshop will be a big help to enhance the knowledge of the community.” FGD participants – Samahan ng Kabataan
Based on the findings of the study, the following recommendations are forwarded: (Aided with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Handbook on the Crime Prevention Guidelines, 2010)