I think it is good because it provides a presumption that children over 10 but under 14 cannot be considered responsible for their criminal actions. However if there is extensive evidence that the child knew what they were doing was wrong, then the prosecution can rebut doli incapax and proceed with the criminal trial process (albeit with other safeguards for children such as the childrens court being a closed court, etc)
But in other cases where a child has made a mistake and should not be held criminally liable, then doli incapax does its job.
I personally don't agree with the argument that it does harm to victims and society, and realistically, without doli incapax, there would be a greater risk of harm to victims society and even the offender as the child will be further exposed to the atrocities of criminal justice system at such an early age which does not help anyone and would only disadvantage them even more
Just my $0.02 but i understand depending on the essay question this would be in response to, you could twist it to support your view
