New Law Says Filipinos Are Legally Children Until They Turn 24 Years Old

Laws can be rather tricky. Everything has to be defined properly otherwise the law cannot be properly enforced. Take the anti-child marriage law recently passed in the Philippines. It's about time say some. Others, Muslims especially, fear it will encroach on their way of life. What is crucial in this law is the definition of a child. 

https://pcw.gov.ph/republic-act-11596-an-act-prohibiting-the-practice-of-child-marriage-and-imposing-penalties-for-violations-thereof/

(a) Child refers to any human being under eighteen (18) years of age, or any person eighteen (18) years of age or over but who is unable to fully take care and protect oneself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition;

According to this law a child is anyone under 18 or over 18 who is unable to take care of themselves such as the mentally handicapped. This law then applies to that category of persons. 

But let's take a look at another law which was recently passed. This is a law geared toward strengthening policies against human trafficking. 

https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/downloads/2022/06jun/20220604-RA-11862-RRD.pdf

The passage in question comes from section 4 sub paragraph m.

(m) To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor, maintain, offer, hire, provide, receive, or adopt a child for deployment abroad as migrant worker. 

Provided, That when the victim is a child, the means to commit these unlawful acts as enumerated in the first paragraph of this section shall not be necessary: Provided, further, That in the case of overseas domestic work, a 'child' means a person below twenty-four (24) years old." 

This law is an amendment of RA 9208 which defines a child the same as the anti-child marriage law. It is in section 3.

(b) Child - refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age or one who is over eighteen (18) but is unable to fully take care of or protect himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition.

https://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2003/ra_9208_2003.html

The definition from RA 9028 has not been changed in any way. That means there are three definitions of a child in RA 11826. The first being anyone below 18, the second anyone above 18 who cannot take care of themselves, and the third is anyone below the age of 24 when being recruited as an overseas domestic worker. But does that mean would-be OFWs who are not being recruited as domestics but under 18 can still be recruited? Or are they too considered children?

I am no lawyer but reading this prima facie it appears rather convoluted and unnecessary. Surely the government has specific reasons for adding the clause in sec 4 sub m but did they consider that now in the same law they have three definitions of what it means to be a child? Is there any other law like this in the Philippines or elsewhere where the law uses the same word with more than one definition?