‘Unsafe, Unjust and Harmful to Wider Society’: Grounds for Raising the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility in England and Wales

Youth Justice ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Goldson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Community Safety ◽  
Social Harm ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Progressive Reform ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Human Rights Standards

This article assesses critically the means by which social (symbolic) and statutory (institutionalized) constructions of child ‘offenders’ in England and Wales intersect and underpin processes of responsibilization and adultification. It is argued that securing immunity from prosecution should be the principal driver for raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility. In this sense the analysis is less concerned with questions of capacity and mens rea and more interested in: compliance with international human rights standards; modelling a system of justice that is broadly compatible with law, policy and practice in Europe (and elsewhere); ensuring that criminal law coheres with civil law; minimizing social harm and obtaining the best outcomes for children in conflict with the law, the wider community and the general public in respect of crime prevention and community safety. Finally, the prospects for such progressive reform within a context of heightened politicization are considered.

scholarly journals The Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: The Need for a Holistic Approach

Youth Justice ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 147322541989378
Author(s):  
Aaron Brown ◽  
Anthony Charles
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Youth Justice ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Outcomes For Children

The minimum age of criminal responsibility in England and Wales remains 10 years: something which has attracted criticism globally by policy makers and youth justice practitioners. Yet, the Westminster Government refuses to consider changes to minimum age of criminal responsibility, despite evidence supporting reform. This article, drawing on the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child’s consultation to revise General Comment No. 10 (2007) and the activities of UK devolved administrations, explores the need for minimum age of criminal responsibility reform, considering how a holistic approach focused on diversion and the provision of rights respecting appropriate interventions can create positive, even transformative outcomes for children.

scholarly journals Exploring Children’s Understanding of the Legal Rights of Suspects in England and Wales

Youth Justice ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 147322542110305
Author(s):  
Vicky Kemp ◽  
Dawn Watkins
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Young People ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Children And Young People ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Research Interviews ◽  
International Human ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Human Rights Standards

While studies have explored adult suspects’ understanding of their legal rights, seldom are the experiences of children and young people taken into account. In this article, we discuss findings arising out of research interviews conducted with 61 children and young people; many of whom have experience of being suspects. From listening to their points-of-view, we find that children and young people fundamentally lack understanding of the rights of suspects, and especially the inalienable nature of those rights. We argue this is not surprising when children are being dealt with in an adult-centred punitive system of justice, which is contrary to international human rights standards.

scholarly journals The Mexican General Law on the Forced Disappearance of Persons, Disappearances Committed by Individuals and the National Missing Persons System: How Many Steps Forward?

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 125
Author(s):  
Salvador Leyva Morelos Zaragoza
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Next Of Kin ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Missing Persons ◽  
General Law ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Chain Of Command ◽  
International Human ◽  
Human Rights Standards

In 2017, more than 40 years after some of the first documented cases of forced disappearance in Mexico, the General Law on the Forced Disappearance of Persons, Disappearances Committed by Individuals and the National Missing Persons System was published. The approval and enactment of the General Law constitutes a step toward ensuring the free and full enjoyment of human rights of victims of forced disappearance and their next of kin, in accordance with the international human rights standards concerning forced disappearances established by international human rights treaties, the Inter- American Court of Human Rights case law, the recommendations issued by the United Nations Committee and Working Group on Forced or Involuntary Disappearances, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The General Law introduces and modifies institutions, procedures and guidelines that contribute to ensuring the rights to justice, truth and reparation. However, the General Law does not fully comply with international human rights standards regarding military jurisdiction and criminal responsibility within the chain of command. Also, the proper and effective implementation of the General Law requires strong political will and sufficient material and human resources from the three levels of government. Otherwise, the General Law will simply be regarded as a piece of paper.

scholarly journals The common law influence over the age of criminal responsibility – Australia

2016 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-300
Author(s):  
Thomas Crofts
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Common Law ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
The Common

This article explores how Australian jurisdictions came to have an approach to the age of criminal responsibility similar to that which existed in England and Wales until 1998. It discusses recent debates in Australia about reforming the minimum age of criminal responsibility and the presumption of doli incapax. This shows that while there has been criticism of the presumption of doli incapax within Australia no jurisdiction has taken the English step of abolishing it. It finds that a greater challenge to the presumption of doli incapax may, however, come from calls for an increase in the minimum age of criminal responsibility to the age of 12. While several common law countries have raised the minimum age level to 12 (as called for by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child), they have also abolished the presumption of doli incapax, thus reducing protection for 12- and 13-year-olds. This article argues that unless the minimum age of criminal responsibility is raised to 14 or 16, as preferred by the UN Committee, there are good reasons to retain the presumption of doli incapax.

A Study of the Use of Sharia Law in Religious Arbitration in the United Kingdom and the Concerns That This Raises for Human Rights

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessie Brechin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Human Rights Standards

The use of Islamic norms in the determination of arbitration in England and Wales has become a source of great controversy. Concerns are raised for the human rights of vulnerable parties who may be pressured into arbitrations and who may not be treated fairly under the agreed rules of arbitration or by arbitrators themselves. The Arbitration Act 1996 limits the ability to appeal arbitration decisions and as such does not safeguard the rights of these parties. As a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights the UK is under an obligation to uphold human rights standards domestically, and it is argued that the way in which arbitration on religious norms is currently regulated does not comply with this obligation. This article considers some of the possible adaptations or alterations that could rectify the situation, improving parties' experience of religious arbitration and ensuring that the system remains compatible with international human rights obligations.

The Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: A Medico-Legal Perspective

Youth Justice ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enys Delmage
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Brain Development ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Brain Structures ◽  
Scientific Understanding ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Effective Age ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Minimum Age

The minimum age of criminal responsibility is set in England and Wales at 10 years of age (Children and Young Persons Act 1963), whilst the effective age of most civil responsibilities is 16. Research allows us to consider the speed of development of key brain structures in terms of decision-making and this in turn aids in discussion of where the minimum age should be set. This article reviews the evolution of the minimum age of criminal responsibility and examines the setting of this age in light of both civil attainment ages and the current scientific understanding of brain development.

Some Practical Implications for Policy and Practice

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph Henham
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Working Relationship ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Community Based ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
National Regulation ◽  
Probation Service ◽  
Practical Implications

This chapter explains the practical consequences of what has been proposed. It begins by evaluating current models and suggested approaches for incorporating public opinion into sentencing, explaining how the proposed changes would differ. It then sets out some practical reforms to sentencing in England and Wales, including greater coordination between the national regulation of sentencing discretion through the Sentencing Council and regional or community-based sentencing practices. Regional branches of the Sentencing Council are also advocated. In addition to further practical reforms, a greater role for the Sentencing Council in the ethical surveillance of sentencing, the development of new procedural rules, and enhanced training for judges and magistrates are proposed. Finally, a closer working relationship between the Sentencing Council, the courts, the CPS, defence lawyers, and the Probation Service is advocated to develop guidance clarifying their role within the new sentencing framework.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document