scholarly journals THE POSITION AND THE ROLES OF THE ADVISOR OF THE COURT FOR CHILDREN IN THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM IN MALAYSIA: ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (24) ◽  
pp. 84-103
Author(s):  
Norazla Abdul Wahab ◽  
Nur Zulfah Md Abdul Salam ◽  
Hammad Mohamad Dahalan
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
And Training

The establishment of the Court for Children in the juvenile justice system is to provide legal protection for children. This court consists of a Magistrate and two advisors which one of them is a woman as provided in section 11 (2) of the Child Act 2001. Basically, the role of the advisor of the Court for Children is to advise the Magistrate relating to the orders (punishment) to be imposed on children who are in conflict with the law and to advise the parents or guardians whenever necessary. However, Section 11 of the Child Act 2001 is the only provision as regards the advisor of the Court for Children in Malaysia. There are no other guidelines or regulations on the mechanism of execution of duties of the advisor, its appointments, and training requirements. Thus, this study aims to identify the issues and challenges relating to the position and roles of the advisor. An analysis is made of legal documents and academic journals. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with the Social Welfare Department (JKM), Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development (KPWKM), Legal Affairs Division (BHEUU), Prime Minister Department (JPM), and five Children Court advisors (who are representing the urban and rural areas). The study found that the Children Court advisor was recognized in 1947 via the Juvenile Court Act 1947. However, there are several issues and challenges to be addressed including the jurisdiction, governance structure, a mechanism of execution of duties, appointment criteria, the appointment process, modules, and training for Children Court advisors. The absence of guidelines, specific regulations, or manuals has limited the functions and roles of the Children Court advisor. This study suggests a better legal framework for the Children Court advisors to increase their credibility and professionalism. Thus, they can play an effective role in the juvenile justice system in Malaysia.

scholarly journals MODEL PERADILAN RESTORATIF DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN ANAK (Kajian tentang Praktik Mediasi Pelaku dan Korban dalam Proses Peradilan Anak di Wilayah Hukum Balai Pemasyarakatan Purwokerto)

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angkasa Angkasa ◽  
Saryono Hanadi ◽  
Muhammad Budi Setyadi
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Police Department ◽  
Justice Model ◽  
Article 5 ◽  
Mediation Practice

Legal fundament of implementation of restorative justice in the phase investigation of juvenile justice system  in Indonesia stated in article 5 sentence (1) Law No. 8 Year 1981 concerning KUHAP; article 42 Law No. 3 Year 1997 concerning juvenile court, article 16 sentence ( 1) letter (l), sentence (2) and article 18  Law No. 2 Year 2002 concerning Police Department of Republic of Indonesia, Confidential Telegram of Kabareskrim No. Pol. TR/359/DIT,I/VI/2008. Mediation Perpetrator and Victim in the course of Jurisdiction of Child in jurisdiction territory of prison in Purwokerto, in the form of peace among victim and perpetrator of this child, is conducted in inspection phase, is in prosecution phase and inspection of justice have never been conducted by mediation. Implementation of Mediation in case of child in Jurisdiction territory of Bapas Purwokerto, not yet earned a Restorative Justice Model. This Matter is based on fact that goals of this mediation practice tend to only aim to decontrol continuation. Kata kunci: Juvenile Justice System; Restorative Justice Model; Mediation; prison

Relationships Matter: The Role Transition Specialists Play in Youth’s Reentry From the Juvenile Justice System

2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-16
Author(s):  
James Sinclair ◽  
Deanne Unruh ◽  
Kim Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Pacific Northwest ◽  
School Engagement ◽  
Independent Living ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
School Setting ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Correctional Setting ◽  
Youth Interviews

Increasing engagement to school, employment, and community are strong predictors of reducing recidivism for youth involved in the juvenile justice system. This study examined what occurs at reentry upon leaving a youth correctional setting. This study comprised of qualitative semi-structured interviews of transition specialists (TSs; n = 7) and young offenders ( n = 8) who participated in a 4-year reentry project in the Pacific Northwest. A total of 21 (13 TS and eight youth) interviews were thematically coded. Findings from this study included the important role of the TS in supporting a youth’s school, family, and community reentry. Key themes are described around the services to support employment, school engagement, and independent living during a youth’s reentry into a school setting.

Delinquents' Attitudes toward the Juvenile Justice System

1973 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1119-1124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Woodbury
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Random Sample ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Tests Of Significance ◽  
Black Delinquents ◽  
Z Transformation ◽  
Attitudes Toward The Police

The study investigated (1) the differences in attitudes toward legal agencies between white and black delinquents, (2) group differences on anomie scales and (3) intergroup correlational analyses among attitudes toward legal agencies and anomie scales. A random sample of delinquents (73 white and 73 black) were administered measures of attitudes toward the police, juvenile court, probation and anomie. t tests of significance and z tests using Fisher's r to z transformation assessed group differences. White delinquents had more unfavorable attitudes toward the juvenile court while black delinquents had more hostile attitudes toward the police. White delinquents had more feelings of valuelessness and hopelessness. Black delinquents had more of powerlessness. Correlations suggest that attitudes toward legal agencies and those of anomie may be acquired independently.

Balanced Approach and Restorative Justice Efforts in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania

2001 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
RONALD J. SEYKO
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Special Session ◽  
Court System ◽  
Allegheny County ◽  
Juvenile Probation ◽  
Balanced Approach

On November 17, 1995, the governor of Pennsylvania signed into law Special Session Act 33 of 1995, which redefined the purpose of Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system to incorporate the principles of the Balanced Approach and Restorative Justice (BARJ) philosophy. This article describes the genesis of the new law, explains the BARJ model, and illustrates the effect that the law is having on the juvenile court system in Allegheny County. The article specifically focuses on the numerous projects that the Allegheny County juvenile probation department has instituted to meet the BARJ obligation.

The Importance of Evaluation and Monitoring Within the Disproportionate Minority Contact (DMC) Mandate

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 305-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer H. Peck
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Delinquency ◽  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Disproportionate Minority Contact ◽  
Prevention Act ◽  
Evaluation And Monitoring ◽  
Five Phases

In 2002, the reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 required that states participating in the Formula Grants Program must put forth a good faith effort at addressing juvenile delinquency and the presence of minority youth at all decision-making points of the juvenile justice system without the use of numerical quotas. The last decade has brought about increases in states’ efforts at identifying and assessing the extent of disproportionate minority contact (DMC) across juvenile court contacts. Many states have already implemented or are currently implementing intervention and prevention efforts at reducing DMC. However, the segments of identification, assessment, and intervention are only three of the five phases of the DMC mandate. In light of the progression of the DMC mandate since its original implementation in 1988, the purpose of this essay is to spark discussion on the future of examining DMC in the juvenile justice system through a researcher’s perspective. Various topics that relate to DMC are presented as ideas for readers to consider, as they progress with their research agendas.

Should We Give Up Reform?

1984 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley M. Hufstedler
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
National Council ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Proper Role ◽  
Crime And Delinquency

This article is an expanded version of an address given before the 1984 Conference: “Rethinking Juvenile Justice,” sponsored by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency. The article traces the evolution of the Juvenile Court and discusses the pressures placed upon the juvenile justice system at the same time it punishes, incapacitates and reforms youthful offenders. The author challenges juvenile justice planners to develop humane, cost-effective, and community-based alternatives as a means of reducing the current confusion over the proper role of the juvenile court.

scholarly journals Double Jeopardy? Disproportionality in First Juvenile Court Involvement by Disability Status

2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-470 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksis P. Kincaid ◽  
Amanda L. Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Relative Risk Ratio ◽  
Youth With Disabilities ◽  
Policy Practice ◽  
Disability Status ◽  
Health Impairments

The overrepresentation of youth with disabilities in the juvenile justice system is a persistent concern, but estimates of their involvement vary dramatically due to differences in how disability is conceptualized and when involvement in juvenile justice is measured. This study linked juvenile court and educational records for 230,760 students in one state to describe the involvement of students with and without disabilities in juvenile court. Overrepresentation of students with disabilities was not robust to sociodemographic controls (relative risk ratio [RR] = 1.07) but varied by disability category such that students with emotional or behavioral disorders (RR = 1.98) and other health impairments (RR = 1.12) remained overrepresented. Students with disabilities were charged with more severe offenses than their peers without disabilities and were more likely to be petitioned to court with a higher degree of offense even after controlling for the type of offense. Implications for policy, practice, and research are discussed.

提高刑责年龄: 保护或伤害? (RAISING THE AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY: PROTECTION OR HARM?)

1999 ◽  
Vol 33 (01n02) ◽  
pp. 87-96
Author(s):  
铁荣 卢
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Substantial Improvement ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Major Factors ◽  
Protection Order

香港的刑事责任年龄是七岁，即七岁以下的儿童，是不会被推定为有罪。这刑责年龄是国际标准上最低之一。近日本地的法律改革委员会建议将它提高至十岁，香港儿童权利委员会更建议以十四岁为刑责年龄。提高刑责年龄的后果，是所有在法定刑责年龄以下的违法少年都不再需要负法律责任，他们不需要经警司警诫或司法审讯，极其量只能由少年法庭引用保护令来保护他们。本文讨论影响青少年犯罪的三种重要因素，现时处理违法少年的方法，和在研究提高刑责年龄的可行性时，在少年司法制度中需要考虑的因素，特别是在没有彻底改善现行的少年司法制度时，广泛地运用保护令所带出之问题，最后建议一些处理方法。 In Hong Kong, the age of criminal responsibility is seven, i.e. any person aged below seven shall not be convicted of a crime. This age is one of the lowest in the world. Recently, the Law Reform Commission has recommended to raise the age to ten; the Committee on Children's Rights even suggested raising it to 14. If the age of criminal responsibility is to be raised, juvenile offenders would no longer be cautioned by the police or prosecuted in the juvenile court, although care or protection order can be granted o them. This article outlines the major factors affecting juvenile crimes and the current methods in handling juvenile offenders. It also identifies several crucial factors for consideration, in particular the negative effect of using care or protection order when no substantial improvement in the juvenile justice system has been made, if the age of criminal responsibility is to be raised. Several recommendations to improve the juvenile justice system are highlighted too.

scholarly journals La justice des mineurs au Québec : 25 ans de transformations (1960-1985)

Criminologie ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Trépanier
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Young Offenders ◽  
Court Referrals ◽  
Court Dispositions ◽  
Legislative Changes ◽  
Over Time

This paper provides an overview of some of the changes undergone by the juvenile justice system in Quebec since 1960, with a particular attention to the evolution of its legal framework. Major legislative changes have stressed children's rights and diversion. The underlying philosophy of the law has been changed extensively, particularly concerning young offenders. Statistics reveal that the number of court referrals has increased considerably over time, and that diversion policies have been unable to change this trend. Juvenile court dispositions seem to show a greater degree of intervention than before.

Juvenile Aid Panels: An Alternative to Juvenile Court Processing in South Australia

1980 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Sarri ◽  
Patrick W. Bradley
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Justice System ◽  
Juvenile Court ◽  
South Australia ◽  
Juvenile Courts ◽  
Status Offenders ◽  
Court Processing

Diversion and other alternatives to juvenile court processing are being used increasingly in many countries. Juvenile aid panels were developed and implemented in South Australia as a part of the 1971 revised Juvenile Courts Act. Findings from the study of a five-year cohort of youths pro cessed through the juvenile aid panels and the juvenile court are presented and analyzed. The findings indicate that the rate of reappearance of youths processed through the panels was essentially similar to that of youths processed through the court. Thus, as far as the criterion of re cidivism is concerned, this more benign and less stigmatizing mechanism is at least as effective as court processing. Panels were not successful in removing all minor and status offenders from processing in the court, nor were the numbers of cases processed by the court reduced as a result of the panels. Quite the opposite—the entire juvenile justice system grew rapidly during this five-year period, largely because of increased numbers pro cessed by the panels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document