JUNE 25 — The recent school shooting at San Jose National High School in Tacloban City has sent shockwaves across the Philippines and the wider region. Three students lost their lives, others were injured, and an entire school community has been left traumatised. For many, the incident is difficult to comprehend. School shootings remain exceptionally rare in Southeast Asia, making the tragedy all the more disturbing.
As investigations continue, public discussions have centred on various possible factors, including bullying, access to firearms, social media influences, violent online content, and the backgrounds of the young suspects. Such reactions are understandable. Whenever a tragedy of this magnitude occurs, there is an immediate desire to identify a cause. People want answers. They want certainty. Most importantly, they want reassurance that such an event will never happen again. Unfortunately, there are rarely simple explanations for acts of extreme violence.
From a criminological perspective, serious acts of violence seldom emerge from a single cause. Human behaviour is shaped by a complex interaction of individual experiences, family circumstances, peer relationships, school environments, online influences, and broader social conditions. School shootings are often the result of multiple warning signs and multiple missed opportunities for intervention rather than one isolated factor.
Among the issues raised in the aftermath of the Tacloban shooting is the possibility that bullying may have played a role. If these allegations prove true, they deserve serious attention. However, it is important to approach the issue with nuance. Bullying does not excuse violence. Nothing justifies the taking of innocent lives. At the same time, bullying should not be dismissed as irrelevant simply because it does not excuse the crime. For far too long, bullying has often been treated as a normal part of growing up. Victims are told to ignore it, develop resilience, or simply move on. Yet decades of research have consistently demonstrated that persistent bullying can have profound psychological consequences. Anxiety, depression, social isolation, self-harm, school avoidance, diminished self-worth, and feelings of humiliation are not uncommon among young victims. This is why bullying should not be viewed merely as a disciplinary issue. It is also a child protection issue.
One of the most troubling aspects of many bullying cases is that warning signs are frequently visible long before a crisis emerges. Victims may withdraw socially, experience declining academic performance, avoid school, or exhibit signs of emotional distress. Yet these indicators are not always recognised or acted upon. In some cases, students may fear reporting bullying because they believe nothing will change. Others may worry that reporting will make the situation worse.
A security guard checks the bag of a student entering Batasan Hills National High School in Quezon City, Philippines on June 23, 2026. — Reuters pic The challenge for schools is therefore not simply responding to incidents after they occur but identifying problems before they escalate. This raises an uncomfortable but necessary question: have educational institutions become reluctant to discuss accountability?
In recent years, there has been a welcome emphasis on student wellbeing, mental health, and rehabilitation. These are important developments. However, support and accountability should not be treated as opposing concepts. Students who engage in bullying must understand that their actions have consequences. Harmful behaviour cannot be normalised, minimised, or repeatedly excused. At the same time, accountability should not be confused with punishment alone.
The objective should not be to shame, humiliate, or stigmatise children. Rather, it should be to help them understand the impact of their actions, accept responsibility, and change their behaviour. Genuine remorse and behavioural change are often far more effective in preventing future harm than punishment imposed without reflection or understanding.
This is where schools can play a transformative role. Effective anti-bullying strategies should extend beyond disciplinary sanctions. They should include early intervention, counselling services, peer support programmes, digital literacy education, and restorative approaches that encourage empathy and accountability. Victims need to feel heard, believed, and protected. At the same time, students who engage in harmful behaviour need opportunities to understand the consequences of their actions and make meaningful changes.
The Tacloban tragedy also highlights another reality of modern adolescence: young people no longer live separate online and offline lives. Their friendships, conflicts, identities, and experiences increasingly unfold across digital platforms. Cyberbullying, online humiliation, exposure to violent content, and participation in harmful online communities can intensify existing grievances and vulnerabilities. While technology is rarely the sole cause of violence, it can amplify existing problems and should not be ignored in discussions about school safety.
However, it would be a mistake to focus solely on social media, video games, or online content. Such explanations often provide convenient answers while diverting attention from more difficult conversations about school climate, peer relationships, mental health support, and institutional responses to student distress. It is often easier to blame technology than to examine whether students had access to trusted adults, effective reporting mechanisms, or meaningful support systems.
Ultimately, the most important questions are not simply what happened, but whether it could have been prevented. Were students able to report concerns safely? Were complaints taken seriously? Were vulnerable students identified and supported? Were there opportunities for intervention before the situation escalated? These are the questions that deserve careful examination.
The lesson from Tacloban is not that schools need to become fortresses. Nor is it that harsher punishment alone will prevent future tragedies. Rather, it is a reminder that school safety begins long before a weapon enters a classroom. It begins with creating environments where students feel safe, respected, and supported. It begins with taking bullying seriously. It begins with recognising warning signs and responding to them early.
Victims deserve protection. Schools deserve effective tools to intervene. Parents deserve support rather than blame. And young people who engage in harmful behaviour must be held accountable while also being given opportunities for rehabilitation and change. Accountability and compassion are not opposing values. In fact, the most effective responses to bullying require both. The challenge is not choosing between punishment and rehabilitation. It is finding the balance that protects victims, promotes responsibility, encourages meaningful behavioural change, and prevents future harm. If there is one lesson to emerge from the tragedy in Tacloban, it is that warning signs should never be ignored. By the time violence erupts, intervention has already come too late.
* Dr Haezreena Begum Abdul Hamid is a criminologist and senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Universiti Malaya.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
