What of the Child? Preventing the Publication of Children's Names After the Age of 18

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Sophy Baird
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Child Victims ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Right

Children are afforded a number of protections when they encounter the criminal justice system. The need for special protection stems from the vulnerable position children occupy in society. When children form part of the criminal justice system, either by being an offender, victim, or witness, they may be subjected to harm. To mitigate against the potential harm that may be caused, our law provides that criminal proceedings involving children should not be open to the public, subject to the discretion of the court. This protection naturally seems at odds with the principle of open justice. However, the courts have reconciled the limitation with the legal purpose it serves. For all the protection and the lengths that the law goes to protect the identity of children in this regard, it appears there is an unofficial timer dictating when this protection should end. The media have been at the forefront of this conundrum to the extent that they believe that once a child (offender, victim, or witness) turns 18 years old, they are free to reveal the child's identity. This belief, grounded in the right to freedom of expression and the principle of open justice, is at odds with the principle of child's best interests, right to dignity and the right to privacy. It also stares incredulously in the face of the aims of the Child Justice Act and the principles of restorative justice. Measured against the detrimental psychological effects experienced by child victims, witnesses, and offenders, this article aims to critically analyse the legal and practical implications of revealing the identity of child victims, witnesses, and offenders after they turn 18 years old.

scholarly journals Between Convictions and Reconciliations: Processing Criminal Cases in Kazakhstani Courts

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexei Trochev
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Prison Population ◽  
Power Relationships ◽  
Incentive Structure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Major Reform ◽  
The Right

Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 50 : No. 1 , Article 5The criminal justice system in Kazakhstan is full of contradictions: Soviet-era accusatorial bias in pre-trial detention and sentencing goes hand in hand with the pro-defendant bias in closing criminal cases. This paradoxical co-existence of seemingly contradictory biases fits well within the informal power map of the criminal justice system. The major reform—reducing prison population to decrease recidivism and minimize international shaming—was coupled with the more recent drives for closing cases on the basis of reconciliation, the total registration of crimes, and zero tolerance approach to combating crime have been achieved only through the change of the incentive structure in the criminal justice system. The post-Soviet innovation of closing criminal cases of public prosecution based on the reconciliation with the victim of crime has proliferated in Kazakhstan because this matched both the incentives of the key actors in the criminal justice system and demands from private actors who are involved in criminal proceedings. In contrast, other types of public participation, such as jury trials, which implement the right to a fair trial, give teeth to adversarial proceedings, and cultivate judicial independence—requirements of the Constitution of Kazakhstan—have rarely been used because they disrupt existing power relationships within the law-enforcement system.

scholarly journals INSTRUMENTI ZAŠTITE PROCESNIH PRAVA OBRANE U ISTRAZI PREMA ZAKONU O KAZNENOM POSTUPKU BOSNE I HERCEGOVINE

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-187
Author(s):  
Maja Pilić ◽  
Zdravko Rajić
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Procedural Rights

With the entry into force of the Criminal Procedure Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the roles of the prosecutor and the court have been changed significantly compared to the earlier legislation, especially in the investigative procedure. According to the existing normative framework, the role of the court in the investigation is much more passive since at this stage of the procedure the court does not control the merits of conducting the investigation. The mixed accusatorial concept of investigation as the one existing in the criminal justice system of Bosnia and Herzegovina has led to certain restrictions on the rights of the defence in investigation. Investigation is an important stage in criminal proceedings that is conducted for evidence and data collecting necessary to decide whether to file an indictment or discontinue the proceedings, as well as for evidence that can be presented at the main hearing and upon which the judgment is rendered. It is therefore necessary to ensure that a proper and lawful investigation is conducted. This means to make sure that all parties involved in the investigation, especially defence are treated in a fair manner. The right to defence is a fundamental human and constitutional right guaranteed by international conventions. The right to defence results in several individual rights enjoyed by suspects in preliminary proceedings. In order to ensure effective judicial protection of the rights of the suspects, the paper analyses the domestic criminal justice system and presents comparative legal solutions regarding the protection of procedural rights of the defence in investigation. The fundamental issues in analysing regulatory framework in Bosnia and Herzegovina are the lack of effective judicial protection of procedural rights of the defence, the absence of an effective legal remedy to conduct an investigation facilitating the principle of a fair trial for defence and the principle of equality of arms in pre-trial proceedings. In addition, the paper analyses the issue of informing the suspect of an order for investigation, since according to applicable regulations, the suspect does not even need to know about an investigation conducted against him, which is a violation of the principle of right to a fair trial.

Victim Participation in Parole Proceedings in South Africa

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
South African ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Prison Inmate ◽  
Parole Board ◽  
Victims Of Crime ◽  
The Right

South African law provides for circumstances in which victims of crime may participate in the criminal justice system at the investigation, prosecution (trial), sentencing and parole stages. In South Africa, a prison inmate has no right to parole although the courts have held that they have a right to be considered for parole. In some cases, the victims of crime have a right to make submissions to the Parole Board about whether the offender should be released on parole. Section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 provides for the right of victims of crime to participate in parole proceedings. The purpose of this article is to discuss section 299A and illustrate ways in which victims of crime participate in the parole process. The author also recommends ways in which victims’ rights in section 299A of the Criminal Procedure Act could be strengthened.

scholarly journals RESTORATIVE JUSTICE SEBAGAI ALTERNATIF PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP KORBAN KEKERASAN DALAM RUMAH TANGGA

2009 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 238
Author(s):  
Rena Yulia
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Violent Crime ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Right

AbstractThe victim of domestic violence had needed of protection concept thatdifferent with another victim of violent crime. Participation of victim haswant to give justice for all. It is, because punishment to offender brings theimpact for victim. Restorative justice is a concept in criminal justice systemwhich is participation victim with it. The present of criminal justice system isthe offender oriented. Victim has not position to considerate offenderpunishment. Only offender can get the right and the victim hopeless. In thedomestic violence, victim and offender have relationship. Because there area family. · So, probability they have some interest in economic and relation.When wife become a victim and husband as offender, his wife hasdependency economic from her husband. It means, if husband get a decisionfrom judge, his wife will be suffer. Domestic violence is different crime. So, itis necessQ/y to made some different concept. In this article, will discussedabout alternative of legal protection for victim of domestic violence incriminal justice system to protect the victim

Rising Waves of Feminism or Faltering Steps of Criminal Justice – What Plagues India?

2020 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-236
Author(s):  
Dipa Dube ◽  
Ankita Chakraborty
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Violence Against Women ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Recent Past ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Face ◽  
Abuse Of Women ◽  
Ongoing Concern

AbstractIn the recent past, the #MeToo movement has shaken India. A docket of high-flying names, from politicians to celebrities and journalists, have come under scrutiny for alleged sexual abuse of women. Flagged by a Bollywood actress, the #MeToo campaign in India ignited feminists, academicians, and policymakers to re-examine women’s continued abuse in all sections of society. Despite a stringent legal regime enforced after the Nirbhaya tragedy, the abuse of women continues unabated. Feminists opine that violence against women remains an ongoing concern that is heightened in the face of a waning criminal justice system that fails to address their plight. Lack of confidence in the system discourages women from approaching the authorities, something palpable in #MeToo allegations, where women preferred to remain silent in the face of inevitable backlash from society, lack of support and cooperation from police and prosecution and finally, courts, where the victim is positioned as the accused to respond to questions of how and why? This article examines the #MeToo movement against the rising crime graph’s backdrop and the criminal justice system’s consequent failure to respond to the same.

Housing Inequalities, Crime, and the Criminal Justice System: The Shifting Context in England and Wales since the 1980s

2021 ◽  
pp. 242-264
Author(s):  
Emily Gray ◽  
Phil Mike Jones ◽  
Stephen Farrall
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Policy Changes ◽  
Property Owners ◽  
Life Course Studies ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right To Buy

One of the first steps Margaret Thatcher’s government took following their election in 1979 was to introduce legislation that enabled sitting council tenants to buy their council homes. This chapter assesses the legacy of this policy on the experiences of homelessness and contact with the criminal justice system of two cohorts of UK citizens. Using longitudinal studies of people born in 1958 and 1970, the authors explore how policies intended to turn council tenants into property owners, may have also increased the risks of homelessness, and contact with the criminal justice system for others as well as subsequent generations. The authors assess how legislative changes can shape the lives of citizens, and highlight some of the unintended consequences of the ‘right to buy’ policy. Our chapter, therefore is essentially about the investigation of the outcomes of radical system deregulation. Our chapter draws upon concepts derived from life-course studies and historical institutionalist thinking in order to understand in-depth how radical policy changes may shape and alter the lives of ordinary citizens.

scholarly journals Strategic Incapacitation of Indigenous Dissent: Crowd Theories, Risk Management, and Settler Colonial Policing

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miles Howe ◽  
Jeffrey Monaghan
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Social Movements ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Protest Policing ◽  
Indigenous Social Movements ◽  
The Right ◽  
Management Of Risk

Engaging scholarship from sociologies of security to protest policing, this article explores how risk management and actuarial tools have been operationalized in Canadian policing of Indigenous protests. We detail RCMP actuarial tools used to assess individual and group risk by tracing how these techniques are representative of much older trends in the criminal justice system surrounding the management of risk, but also have been advanced by contemporary databanking and surveillance capacities. Contesting public claims of police impartiality and objectivity, we highlight how the construction of riskiness produces an antagonism towards “successful” Indigenous protests. Though the RCMP regularly claim to “protect and facilitate the right to lawful advocacy, protest and dissent,” we show how these practices of strategic incapacitation exhibit highly antagonistic forms of policing that are grounded in a rationality that seeks to demobilize and delegitimize Indigenous social movements.

“Do you understand these charges?”: How procedural communication in youth criminal justice court violates the rights of young offenders in Canada

Semiotica ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 (229) ◽  
pp. 173-191
Author(s):  
Tara Suri
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Oral Language ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Young Offenders ◽  
Legal Professionals ◽  
Youth Criminal Justice Act ◽  
Government Of Canada ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Courtroom

AbstractThis paper considers Canada’s young offenders in the context from which they enter the youth criminal courtroom. To determine how youth criminal justice courts violate the Canadian Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA), this analysis relates said context to several phenomena, including legal linguistics, oral language competency, literacy, communicative competency, non-verbal communication, the physical structure of youth courtrooms, and legal translation (Government of Canada eds. 2018. Youth criminal justice act. Ottawa: Government of Canada.). As a result of the standards of procedural communication upheld by the Canadian criminal justice system, young people’s rights, including the right to be respected regardless of cultural, ethnic, or linguistic differences, the right to be heard and to participate in proceedings, the right to be sentenced meaningfully, the right to privacy, and the right to be tried in a timely manner are abused in the youth criminal courtroom. Although insufficient structures of procedural communication cause these issues and are beyond the control of counsel, defense counsel are often blamed for their effects. Legal professionals must make important adjustments such as altering the formal speech required in youth criminal courtrooms, employing legal professionals with the role of translating legal jargon to young people in the courtroom, and closing youth courtrooms off from the public to reduce the YCJA violations occurring in youth criminal justice court. These adjustments are ultimately the responsibility of the Canadian criminal justice system.

scholarly journals How Silent is the Right to Silence?

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Biber
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Religion And Psychology ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
The Law ◽  
Critical Interpretation ◽  
The Right

A long-held and fundamental principle of our criminal justice system is that people accused of crimes have a right to silence, arising from the presumption of innocence. Rules of evidence try to protect this ‘right’ during trial, by ensuring that juries understand that adverse inferences cannot be drawn from the silence of the accused. Silence, in court, can mean nothing, and we are not to speculate about what might motivate an accused person to remain silent, or what they might have said had they spoken. However, an examination of the jurisprudence in this area shows that the law is often not dealing with actual silence; sometimes when the law refers to the ‘right to silence’, it seems to mean a ‘refusal to hear’. In other instances, there is actual silence, and yet the law refuses to subject that silence to any critical interpretation, insisting that we cannot infer anything from it. While we have learned, from theatre, music, linguistics, religion and psychology, to develop sophisticated means for interpreting silence, the law demands that we set aside these interpretive tools, hearing silence that isn’t there, and inferring nothing about something.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document