Youth Justice System in England and Wales in Comparison with another Country - Essay Example

Youth Justice System in England and Wales in Comparison with another Country Introduction: Youth justice system or juvenile justice system isconsidered for the youth who commit crimes and thus contribute to severe criminal offences. The systems include such laws, rules, policies, as well as organizations that are mostly concerned in dealings with young criminals. The three stages of juvenile justice system include pre-trial, trial, and post-trial. The pre-trial stage includes those activities that occur in between the time when a crime gets reported and the young criminal is taken for trial in the court. The trial is the stage when the proceedings occur within a court in order to judge the treatments for the young offender depending on his crime. Once the treatment/judgment against him/her is declared the treatment of the offender is represented by the post-trial stage. In the whole process, professionals including police, prosecutor, as well as judges have a significant role to play since it is their powers that together decide and implement the treatment of the young offender (Swain, 2009, p.230). Earlier it was thought that justice systems do not have much impact on the behavior of the offenders and that such individuals cannot be corrected. However, in England and Wales, the youth justice system was more strictly taken concern of after the incident of a murder of a young child by another two 10 years’ old boys. This incident had shaken the world and since then the justice systems in these countries had become more strict and severe to take measures against youth crimes. Establishment of Youth Justice Board was considered intending to set up proper leaders and teams as well as standards to focus on the youth crimes occurring in these countries and thereby implementing measures to treat such offenders correcting them and bringing them back into the society (Graham & Moore, 2006, pp.65-66). The present study focuses on the youth justice system prevailing in England and Wales and comparing the system with that of another country that has been considered to be Netherlands for the particular study and discussing the extent to which each of these countries takes into account the welfare and rights of the child. The Youth Justice Board: The Youth Justice Board (YJB) in England and Wales represents a public body that is in charge of the justice system in England and Wales. The Secretary of State for Justice appoints the members of the body. The purpose of this board is to prevent criminal activities by young individuals thus making sure that the offenders are safely and securely taken care of while their trials proceed. The reasons for the youth being involved in crimes are tried to be analyzed by this board such that they can be prevented from repeating the activities in the future (About the Youth Justice Board, 2012). A survey conducted by the British Crime Survey (BCS) reveals that according to the perceptions of the society or the community, young offenders need to be rehabilitated in order to correct them of their crimes that they have committed. Around 45 percent of the respondents of the study by BCS had supported the rehabilitation program and believed that the Youth Justice System should have their focus on such programs. However other respondents had their belief that the young delinquents were treated very leniently by the justice system (Youth Justice Statistics 2010/11, 2012). To understand these issues, the justice system, the records of criminal activities, and the respective treatments in England and Wales would be relevant for understanding through a detailed study that follows in the further sections of the report. Youth Justice System in England and Wales: The Youth Justice Board (YJB) is in charge of the youth justice system in England and Wales. The board has the responsibility of managing the young offenders as well as determining ways through which such offenders may be prevented from performing crimes in future. Of a total ?800 million that is considered as the cost of crime dealing with young offenders in the year 2009-10, studies reveal that that the board has spent around ?500 million of which ?300 million was spent on the custody of the young offenders. Improvements in the youth crimes are visible over the period of time between 2005 and 2010 when the rates of crimes among the youth have been found to have decreased. However even if there has been a decrease in the rates of the crimes, serious offences are still known to have been taking place (The youth justice system in England and Wales: Reducing offending by young people, 2011, pp.7-8). The government policies in England and Wales are significantly focused on the prevention of crimes by correcting the young offenders. Several prevention measures have been considered and targeted for the offenders which are the responsibilities of local Young Offending Teams (YOT). The government and the justice system in England and Wales have also delivered in determining if young individuals can be prevented from getting involved in any kind of trouble, which might prevent them from attempting crimes. The key focus of the system is thus to deal with different problems that the youth face causing them to commit crimes. It has been obtained that lack of proper education, problems in family relationships, presence of family members who are themselves offenders of some crimes, as well as misuse of available facilities often tend to create a criminal mind in the youth (Blakeman, n.d., pp.80-81). Certain programs have been considered by the youth justice system that are targeted towards taking care of the rights and welfare of young offenders and trying to understand what factors lead to the crimes by the youth. These are as follows: Youth Inclusion Program: One such program is the Youth Inclusion Program that takes into consideration those young individuals between the ages of 8-17 years who are at high risks of getting involved in offensive activities leading to crimes. Different agencies, police departments, social services, educational authorities are involved in the process of identifying such individuals at risk (Blakeman, n.d., p.81). Thus this program tends to recognize the individuals before the crime gets committed and thus is capable of preventing the crimes. Positive results have also been derived as a consequence of this measure and the rates of arrest of young individuals have been found to be have decreased (Blakeman, n.d., p.81). Youth Inclusion and Support Panels: This program considers the individuals of ages 8-13 years who are at high risk of attempting offensive crimes. This program primarily assists the YJB in a manner such that the board can achieve its goals of reducing the chances of young offenders attempting crimes. This program also includes authoritative members from different agencies working for the same purpose. The program tries to connect the public services with the needs of children and their families such that they can be assisted to avoid troublesome situations (Blakeman, n.d., p.81). Parenting: Parenting involves the parents of young children in the program such that they can learn how to deal with their children. The program intends to improve their behavior and attitude towards crime and offensive activities. It provides with different advices and opinions in regard to their child’s behavior, communication difficulties, setting of boundaries for them, and other related issues. The focus of the program is primarily on the parenting of the children since it has been obtained that poor parenting often leads to criminal offences by young children. If parents are involved in the justice system, then they are given the opportunities to attend the different parenting programs for their improvement. In case parents show non-interests in such measures the system also allows the local bodies to issue orders making it compulsory for the parents to attend and follow such program realizing their intentions and need (Blakeman, n.d., p.81). Safer School Partnerships: This particular program is concerned in dealing with any offensive measure or act that is visible in or around the compounds of a school. New policing model has been considered for the safety and security of the schools to protect the young individuals from getting involved in criminal activities. Based on this new model, a police officer is based for all the schools that are under the rules of the system named as SSP or Safer School Partnerships. It is the responsibility of the officer to work in collaboration with other local agencies and staff of the school and reduce the offensive behavior prevailing within the school premises, trying to improve the discipline, identifying the students who are at more risks and determining measures to prevent them by directly getting associated with them, making certain that students are involved in full time educational programs that are believed to keep them busy and prevent from involving in wrong activities, and also trying to create a safer environment for the students (Blakeman, n.d., pp.81-82). Mentoring: This program associates a mentor with a young individual who is at risk of committing a crime, or has already committed one. The purpose is to motivate and hold up the individual by maintaining a strong relationship with him/her. It might be a long term process such that a trustworthy relationship can be built between the two individuals. This would help in the understanding process of the individual who would find him/her self comfortable with the mentor and thus confide the inner feelings and problems that otherwise might lead to offensive behavior and activity. The relationship that the mentor plans to build with the young individual is a part of the program and hence reflects on clearly defined goals of crime prevention among young offenders (Blakeman, n.d., p.82). Considering the activities and performances of the YJB in England and Wales, it has been obtained that the system has proved to be successful in decreasing the rates of youth crimes in these countries. Success has been more observed with the cases where utmost care could be taken regarding the rights and welfare of the young individual as against those individuals who have been punished severely. However, in spite of cases of successful crime prevention, it has also been stressed that more enhanced measures are required to obtain further improved results such that youth crimes can be put under strict control measures. The current measures are successfully applicable on the offenders who have committed crimes for the first time but it is still difficult to control them who have become used to committing crimes (The youth justice system in England and Wales: Reducing offending by young people, 2011, pp.5-6). Youth Justice System in Netherlands: In the Netherlands, of a total population of around 16.2 million, approximately 3.6 million are below 18 years of age (Laan, 2006, p.145). The media has a significant role to play in the youth crimes occurring in the Netherlands. This is largely because the media bring in front of the public, the rates and kinds of crimes being committed by young offenders. The media consider the crimes committed by an individual of 10 years’ age and of 22 years’ age to be equal. However, the justice system in the Netherlands does not have any provision to punish offenders who are below 12 years of age. Those who are between the ages of 12 and 18 fall under the juvenile justice system and are accordingly treated while those who are above 18 years are treated based on the adult justice system (Winterdyk, 2002, p.386). Juvenile crimes have been a serious issue in the Netherlands since the 1990s. The increasing rates of youth crimes had led the country to consider steps sincerely towards prevention of crimes. For this purpose a committee has been formed under the name Juvenile Crime Committee that is focused on fast and effective responses to the criminal activities by young offenders. The committee believes that when crimes are associated with young offenders, the reactions on the part of the justice system need to be fast, early and reliable. Also, the social environment in which the offender lives in, or of which he/she is a part of, needs to be learnt in order to understand the impacts of the environment on the individual. As per a new penal law that was introduced in the country in 1995, the system considered certain policies punishing the offenders. Since the treatments were not meant to be equal to the ones in adult justice system, hence certain alternatives were also thought of (Wittebrood, 2003, pp.435-436). The chief policy that the Dutch government intends to follow is to prevent the crimes from being committed by the young offenders. In order to achieve this, different problems faced by the young individuals are tried to be identified at an early stage such that measures can be immediately undertaken to prevent the problems leading to any serious act of crime by the young individuals. The family members as well as the school authorities are involved in these measures to effectively implement the policies of prevention of crimes as well as protection of the welfare of the young individuals. In cases where prevention measures prove to fail and young offenders are still known to commit crimes, measures of punishment are also well thought-out that might include HALT referrals or custodian sentences for longer periods of time (Wittebrood, 2003, p.436). Halt referrals are considered for cases that include smaller level of crimes like shoplifting or theft. In such cases, the offender is asked for damage compensation or is asked to carry on restorative activities for certain period of time (Junger-Tas & Decker, 2006, p.154). The welfare of the youth is a significant concern for Netherlands as well. The Netherlands Youth Institute (NJI) is an institute that is concerned with the care and welfare of the young children. The institute focuses on the youth development measures that can enhance the parenting and children activities in a disciplined manner carrying a positive attitude. Professionals are involved significantly in these measures and are trained accordingly for the successful implementation of the policies and programs in prevention of crimes. The NJI is a public body that considers all matters related to the youth, their problems, their offensive behaviors, their risk of committing crimes, and tries to address all these issues sincerely towards achieving the crime prevention goals (Country Sheet on Youth Policy Netherlands, 2009, p.7). Youth Justice System in England and Wales: A Comparison with the System in the Netherlands: From the above sections of the study, it can be realized that although the welfare of the youth is considered significantly in England & Wales as well as in the Netherlands, yet there are certain differences in the treatment of the offenders in these countries. For instance, in case of England and Wales, the youth justice system clearly declares that the offenders would be punished and that happens irrespective of their ages. However in case of Netherlands, the rule states that there can be no punishment for offenses committed by children who are less than 12 years of age. Minor offenders in England and Wales might be presented in adult court if the case permits. But in case of Netherlands, minor offenders can in no case be presented in the adult court. Penal law can be applied in the adult court in case of youth justice system in England and Wales. In case of Netherlands the penal law might be applied in the youth court only (Dijk & Nuytiens, 2004, p.4). From the already discussed studies, it can here be mentioned that the sincerity, with respect to crime prevention keeping in focus the welfare of the youth, is more in the youth justice system of England and Wales in comparison to the Netherlands. This can be supported with the fact that in England and Wales, the youth are not distinguished as per their age and therefore children below a certain age are not let to go even if they have committed crimes, a situation that is quite unlike with that in the Netherlands. If two children of 10 years’ age can murder another small child, it needs to be understood that such small children also need to be considered as equally important for treatment like the youth offenders. Thus if the Netherlands’ justice system allows the offenders of ages below 12 years not to be treated or punished even if they commit crimes, it would be reflected that the country is actually allowing youth crime to take place. It would also be necessary to discuss here that if children who are involved the paths of crime can be initially treated properly, motivated and brought back to the community, then several lives could be saved. It has been obtained through the study that it might become difficult for a system to correct those individuals who have become used to committing crimes. Thus this difference between the youth justice system in England and Wales and in the Netherlands seems to be significant to be considered immediately. The comparisons between the youth justice systems in England and Wales with that of the Netherlands can be learnt from the treatment of the offenders during their trials in the court. While in England and Wales, the cases are handled by youth courts, in Netherlands, the juvenile cases are handled by special juvenile courts. The minimum age of criminal responsibility in case of England and Wales is 10 years while for Netherlands it is 12 years, although it has been learnt that children of 10 years might also be involved in cases of murder. The age of adult criminal responsibility in all these three countries is the same that is 18 years. In case of the system in England and Wales, the transfer of the juvenile offenders to adult court is allowable, but in case of Netherlands, this policy is not allowed at all. The maximum length of sentence for a juvenile offender in England and Wales is 2 years; in case of Netherlands it can be lifetime as well. In case of England and Wales as well as in the Netherlands, the incarcerated juveniles are allowed to be separated from the adults (McCord, Widom & Crowell, 2001, pp.18-19). In this regard one more significant issue that can be discussed is the intention of rehabilitation of the offenders in the society. In case of the youth justice system in the Netherlands, the policy or intention of rehabilitating the offenders is not found to be taken into sincere consideration in the programs under the justice system. This can also be reflected from the length of the sentence that the courts in Netherlands are allowed to decide through their judgments that can be as long as lifetime for an offender. If the rehabilitation of the offender was considered significantly, then instead of such a long sentence, the system would try to take measures to motivate and assist the offenders to re-enter the society and lead normal lives in their respective communities, which has been obtained by the youth justice system in England and Wales. In England and Wales, not only the prevention of crimes is taken concern of, but if in case the prevention proves to be a failure, the length of the sentence is not more than 2 years. Thus after these two years, the offenders would be able to re-enter their societies. By the time they would remain in the custody, they would be mentored, assisted and motivated to behave normally and reflect discipline in their attitudes and activities. The different programs as undertaken under the youth justice system have also been observed to be more effective and significant in case of England and Wales rather than in the Netherlands. Although all the three countries have their focus on the prevention of crimes, but the welfare and rights of the juvenile offenders seem to be considered more sincerely in the youth justice system in England and Wales than in the Netherlands. Thus, a comparative study reflects that with similar purposes and intentions though, the youth justice systems in England and Wales, and that in the Netherlands prove to have certain significant differences. Such differences give stress on the need to consider sincere concern in order to take care of the lives of young children, help them get out of their criminal minded behavior and motivate and support them to lead a normal life within the society successfully. Conclusion: The study has been focused on a comparative understanding of the youth justice system in the countries of England and Wales, with that in the Netherlands. While the study is concluded, it can be mentioned that all the three countries have the same intentions and purposes as far as the prevention of crimes is concerned and the protection of the rights and welfare of the youth. However, certain differences have also been obtained that need to be considered significantly more by the justice system in the Netherlands in order to be more effective in their purpose. It can be realized that only preventing crimes is not enough. It is also necessary to help offenders who have already committed crimes and suffered punishments, and motivate them to lead normal lives. For this, their length of punishment needs to be less and motivation and supportive measures for a positive treatment would be more required. This has been observed in England and Wales while it seems to be less effective in case of Netherlands. Thus, considering all these factors, if all the countries can take the required measures sincerely and effectively, then the lives of several young offenders might be saved and the world would also be relieved of several criminal attacks. References 1) About the Youth Justice Board (2012), justice, available at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/yjb/ (accessed on March 9, 2012) 2) Blakeman, I. (n.d.), The Youth Justice System of England and Wales, unafei, available at: http://www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/RS_No78/No78_13VE_Blakeman.pdf (accessed on March 9, 2012) 3) Country Sheet on Youth Policy Netherlands (2009), youth-partnership-eu, available at: http://youth-partnership-eu.coe.int/youth-partnership/documents/Questionnaires/Country/2008-09/Netherlands.pdf (accessed on March 10, 2012) 4) Dijk, C.V. & A. Nuytiens (2004), Objectives of Transferring Juvenile Offenders to Adult Court, ncjrs, available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/Mesko/208015.pdf (accessed on March 10, 2012) 5) Graham, J. & C. Moore (2006), Beyond Welfare Versus Justice: Juvenile Justice in England and Wales, International Handbook of Juvenile Justice, pp.65-92, available at: http://www.esc-eurocrim.org/files/ch03.pdf (accessed on March 9, 2012) 6) Junger-Tas, J. & S.H. Decker (2006), International Handbook of Juvenile Justice, New York: Springer 7) Laan, P.H. (2006), Just Desert and Welfare: Juvenile Justice in the Netherlands, International Handbook of Juvenile Justice, pp.145-170, available at: http://www.esc-eurocrim.org/files/ch06.pdf (accessed on March 10, 2012) 8) McCord,J. Widom, C.S. & N.A. Crowell (2001), Juvenile crime, juvenile justice, Wahington, D.C. : National Academies Press 9) Swain, P. (2009), In the shadow of the law, New South Wales: Federation Press 10) The youth justice system in England and Wales: Reducing offending by young people (2011), publications, available at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmpubacc/721/721.pdf (accessed on March 9, 2012) 11) Winterdyk, J. (2002), Juvenile justice systems: international perspectives, Ontario: Canadian Scholars' Press 12) Wittebrood, K. (2003), Juvenile Crime and Sanctions in the Netherlands, Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol.19, No.4, pp.435-453, available at: http://www.sagepub.com/martin/Wittebrood.pdf (accessed on March 10, 2012) 13) Youth Justice Statistics 2010/11 (2012), justice, available at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/statistics/youth-justice/yjb-statistics-10-11.pdf (accessed on March 9, 2012) Read More