Drug use by a minor is rarely just a “criminal problem.” In Philippine law and practice, it sits at the intersection of child protection, public health, and (sometimes) juvenile justice. The correct response depends on who the child is, what exactly happened, and what risks are present—and it must be handled in a way that protects the child’s rights, safety, and privacy.

This guide lays out the legal framework and the practical pathways: Barangay-level actions, DSWD/Local Social Welfare interventions, and juvenile justice options when a drug offense is alleged.

1) The Core Idea: “Drug Use” by a Minor Can Mean Different Legal Situations

A report that “a minor is using drugs” may describe at least four distinct situations:

Use/experimentation without an arrest and without evidence of a crime
- Primarily a child-at-risk / welfare matter.
Drug dependence / substance use disorder
- Primarily a health and rehabilitation matter (with child protection supports).
A drug offense involving the child (possession, use of paraphernalia, etc.)
- Potential Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL); Juvenile justice rules apply.
A child being exploited (used as a runner/courier/pusher, coerced by adults, or living in a drug den)
- Primarily child protection, rescue, and prosecution of adults; may also involve trafficking or child abuse laws.

Correct handling starts by classifying the situation—because the options, procedures, and responsible agencies differ.

2) Key Laws You Must Know (Philippines)

A. Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (RA 9344), as amended by RA 10630

This is the backbone for any case where a child is alleged to have committed an offense.

Key points:

Minimum age of criminal responsibility: 15.
- Below 15: exempt from criminal liability → child is referred to intervention (not prosecution).
- 15 to below 18: exempt from criminal liability unless acted with discernment. Even when discernment exists, the system prioritizes diversion and rehabilitation over punishment.
Establishes intervention (for below 15 and for those without discernment) and diversion (for those 15–<18 data-preserve-html-node="true" with discernment, depending on offense and circumstances).
Requires child-sensitive procedures: rights during custody, separate detention, social worker involvement, confidentiality, and rehabilitation/reintegration.
Supports facilities like Bahay Pag-asa (youth care facilities managed by LGUs) and community-based programs.

B. Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act (RA 9165), with later amendments and implementing rules

This is the primary drug law defining offenses (possession, sale, use, paraphernalia, etc.), and also includes a framework for treatment and rehabilitation of drug dependents (voluntary and compulsory mechanisms).

Important interaction: If the alleged offender is a minor, RA 9344’s child-specific protections and processes control how the case proceeds, even though the underlying offense is under RA 9165.

C. Child protection and related laws (often relevant in drug contexts)

RA 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act): may apply where adults abuse, exploit, or expose children to harmful environments (including drug dens and coercion).
Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act (RA 9208, as amended): may be implicated if a child is recruited/used to commit illegal activities.
Data Privacy Act (RA 10173): strongly relevant to drug test results, case files, and any sharing of identifying information.
Mental Health Act (RA 11036): relevant when substance use is tied to mental health needs and treatment planning.

3) The Most Important Age Rules (Quick Reference)

Child is below 15

Cannot be criminally prosecuted.
Must be referred to the Local Social Welfare and Development Office (LSWDO) for intervention.
Barangay, police, schools, and families should treat the case as child-at-risk and prioritize safety, treatment, and family support.

Child is 15 to below 18

Determine discernment (capacity to understand wrongfulness and consequences).
If without discernment → treated similarly to below 15: intervention, not prosecution.
If with discernment → may be a CICL case, but the system should prioritize:
1. Diversion (where legally available), and
2. If prosecution proceeds, child-specific court processes and possible suspended sentence and rehabilitation.

4) Guiding Principles for Any Response (Barangay/DSWD/Police/School)

Safety first
- If the child is intoxicated, overdosing, self-harming, being abused, or threatened: treat as a medical/child protection emergency.
Do not publicly expose or shame
- The child’s identity must be protected; public “listing” or humiliation can violate confidentiality rules and child protection norms.
Use a case-management approach
- Substance use is frequently tied to family conflict, abuse, neglect, trauma, mental health, or exploitation.
Do not shortcut due process
- Especially in drug allegations: unlawful searches, coerced admissions, and improper handling of evidence can harm the child and collapse legitimate prosecution of adult offenders.
Involve the right actors early
- LSWDO/DSWD social worker should be involved quickly when the subject is a minor.

5) Barangay Options and Responsibilities

Barangays are often the first to hear complaints—from neighbors, schools, parents, or youth leaders. The barangay role is broad: prevention, referral, protection, and (in limited cases) diversion.

A. Prevention and community action (legal and practical)

Barangays commonly act through:

BADAC (Barangay Anti-Drug Abuse Council) programs (community prevention, information, referral).
BCPC (Barangay Council for the Protection of Children) functions aligned with child welfare.
Coordination with schools, SK, faith groups, and health units for youth-focused prevention and early intervention.

Best practice: For minors, barangay anti-drug action should be child protection-centered, not punitive.

B. Intake: what the barangay can do when a report is received

A barangay may:

Receive a report and document it carefully (time, place, reporter, nature of concern).
Conduct a child-sensitive, non-accusatory initial meeting with parent/guardian present when appropriate.
Refer to:
- LSWDO for assessment and case management;
- RHU/health services for evaluation and counseling;
- PNP/WCPD (Women and Children Protection Desk) where abuse/exploitation is suspected;
- PDEA/PNP where adults are supplying drugs or operating locally (focus on adult offenders).

What barangays should avoid:

Publicly posting names or labeling minors as “drug personalities.”
Forcing admissions.
Handling a child like an adult suspect.

C. Barangay-level diversion (when a minor is a CICL and diversion is legally available)

Under juvenile justice rules, certain cases may be resolved through diversion at different levels. The Punong Barangay may act as a diversion authority for less serious offenses within defined limits (commonly framed by the maximum imposable penalty threshold).

Typical diversion flow at barangay level (conceptually):

Child (15–<18) data-preserve-html-node="true" is alleged to have committed an offense and is assessed as acting with discernment.
LSWDO conducts an assessment and helps design a diversion plan.
A diversion agreement/contract may include:
- counseling,
- family intervention,
- education/vocational measures,
- community service appropriate to the child,
- participation in treatment/rehab program if needed,
- restitution (where applicable and fair),
- monitoring and follow-up.
Successful completion → case may be closed/dropped at that level; failure → referral upward (prosecutor/court), depending on the case.

Important practical point: Even if the barangay can facilitate diversion, the LSWDO’s role is central—the plan should not be improvised or purely punitive.

D. Katarungang Pambarangay vs. juvenile diversion

Katarungang Pambarangay (conciliation) is not a universal tool for drug issues, especially where:

the offense is serious,
the state is the offended party,
or a child protection situation exists.

Juvenile diversion is not the same as ordinary barangay conciliation; it is anchored in juvenile justice law and must protect the child’s welfare and rights.

6) DSWD / LSWDO: The Center of the “Child Welfare” Response

In practice, the local LSWDO (and in some circumstances DSWD-managed services) is the lead for:

Assessment
Intervention planning
Diversion support
Referral to treatment
Family services
Protective custody / temporary shelter when needed
Aftercare and reintegration

A. When the child is “at risk” (no criminal case, or below 15)

The social worker may:

conduct a case study (home environment, school status, trauma history, peer influence, safety risks),
arrange family counseling and parenting support,
coordinate with school for non-punitive supports,
refer to medical/psych evaluation and substance use counseling,
develop an intervention plan with monitoring.

B. When the child is a CICL (15–<18 data-preserve-html-node="true" with discernment, offense alleged)

The social worker typically:

participates in discernment assessment (as required in juvenile justice practice),
prepares a social case study report for diversion/court,
designs and monitors a diversion program,
coordinates with LGU youth facilities (e.g., Bahay Pag-asa) if temporary placement is needed,
ensures the child’s rights are respected during police/prosecutorial processes.

C. Protective custody and placement options

If home is unsafe (abuse, neglect, violent coercion, trafficking risk, drug den exposure), options may include:

temporary shelter placement through appropriate child-caring facilities,
kinship/foster care pathways (when viable),
structured residential youth facilities (only when necessary and lawful).

Key legal caution: Any placement must be justified by safety/welfare needs and follow child welfare protocols—placing a child in an adult detention facility is prohibited.

7) Juvenile Justice Options When a Drug Offense Is Alleged

Drug allegations can escalate quickly because some drug offenses carry heavy penalties. For minors, however, procedural safeguards are strict and the system’s goal is rehabilitation.

A. If law enforcement takes a minor into custody

Core requirements (as a matter of juvenile justice protections and constitutional rights) include:

Immediate notification of parents/guardians and the LSWDO.
Access to counsel and protection against coercive questioning.
Child-friendly handling (no intimidation; questioning should be in the presence of appropriate adults/representatives as required).
Separation from adult offenders at all stages of detention/custody.
Documentation and referral to social worker.

B. Diversion as the preferred track (when allowed)

Diversion may occur at:

barangay level (for less serious offenses),
police/prosecutor level,
or court level (for more serious offenses, where permitted).

Because drug offenses vary (possession amount, paraphernalia, etc.), the availability of diversion depends heavily on the charge and penalty range.

C. Court proceedings and outcomes

If a case reaches court and the child is found responsible:

The court may impose child-appropriate measures with rehabilitation and reintegration.
Suspended sentence is a major feature of juvenile justice: rather than immediate punitive imprisonment, the child may be placed under a program with conditions, supervision, and services (subject to statutory limits and the child’s age at promulgation and other factors shaped by amendments).

D. Facilities: Bahay Pag-asa and youth care

LGUs are expected to maintain youth care facilities where CICL can be housed separately from adults when custody is necessary. These are not meant to function as punitive jails but as youth-focused care and rehabilitation environments.

8) Treatment and Rehabilitation Pathways for Minors (Drug Dependence Focus)

Philippine drug law and public health practice recognize two broad rehab routes:

Voluntary submission (initiated by the individual and/or family with legal processes), and
Compulsory confinement (court-ordered, under defined legal requirements).

For minors:

Families, social workers, and health professionals typically pursue family-based and community-based interventions first, unless severity requires residential treatment.
Treatment should be age-appropriate, trauma-informed, and coordinated with schooling and family services.
Confidentiality of records is critical (child protection + data privacy).

Practical integration: Even where a juvenile justice case exists, courts and diversion programs may incorporate treatment and counseling as core conditions.

9) Schools, Drug Testing, Discipline, and Child Protection

Schools often discover drug issues through behavior, peer reports, or testing policies.

Key legal and policy tensions:

Schools have a duty to maintain safety and may have authority to conduct drug testing under legal and regulatory frameworks.
For minors, a positive test or suspicion should trigger intervention, not purely punitive exclusion.
Results and identities must be treated as confidential and handled with due process and child protection protocols.

Good practice approach:

Use the school’s child protection mechanisms,
coordinate with parents/guardians,
refer to LSWDO and health services for assessment and counseling,
avoid “outing” the child to the community.

10) When Adults Are Involved: Focus Enforcement on Exploiters and Suppliers

When a child uses drugs, a common hidden fact is adult involvement:

adults selling or giving drugs to minors,
adults using minors as couriers or pushers,
family members exposing children to drug dens,
gangs coercing youth.

Legal consequences for adults can be severe, especially when minors are involved. In these situations, the most protective and legally sound approach is:

treat the child as a victim or at-risk child,
initiate rescue/protection through child protection channels,
build cases against adult offenders through proper investigative procedures.

11) Confidentiality: Identity Protection Is Not Optional

Juvenile justice principles require protection of the child’s identity. As a practical matter, this means:

barangay records should be restricted,
school disclosures should be minimal and need-to-know,
no public posting, social media exposure, or “parading” of minors,
media should not publish identifying details.

Confidentiality is not just ethical; it reduces stigma, protects rehabilitation prospects, and prevents retaliation and exploitation.

12) Suggested Response Pathways (Decision Map)

Scenario A: Parent discovers drug use at home (no arrest)

Assess immediate safety/medical need.
Seek health evaluation and counseling.
Engage LSWDO for case management if risk factors are present (abuse, neglect, repeated use, mental health issues).
If an adult supplier is identified, coordinate reporting in a way that protects the child.

Scenario B: Barangay receives a report

Document complaint discreetly.
Avoid public exposure; treat as child protection concern.
Refer to LSWDO for assessment/intervention.
If exploitation/supplier is suspected, coordinate with proper law enforcement focusing on adult offenders.

Scenario C: Police apprehension/arrest context

Ensure juvenile safeguards: notify parents/LSWDO; counsel; child-friendly procedure; separate custody.
Explore diversion where legally available.
Integrate treatment and family intervention where drug dependence is indicated.

Scenario D: School discovers suspected use/positive result

Use child protection process, not public discipline.
Coordinate with parents and guidance services.
Refer to health/LSWDO interventions; protect confidentiality.

13) Common Mistakes That Create Harm (and Legal Risk)

Public shaming or “listing” of minors as drug users.
Treating minors as adult criminals (adult detention, coercive interrogation, denial of counsel).
Relying on forced confessions or shortcuts instead of child-sensitive assessment.
Ignoring exploitation indicators (older companions, sudden money, threats, running away).
Using school discipline as the only response, resulting in dropout and deeper risk.
Failing to involve LSWDO early, leaving the case unmanaged and escalating.

14) The Policy Bottom Line

Philippine law pushes a consistent direction: Minors who use drugs should be handled through a child welfare and rehabilitation lens, with juvenile justice safeguards if an offense is alleged, and with enforcement energy aimed at adults who supply, recruit, exploit, or profit.