Juvenile Justice Comparative
Juvenile Justice: A Comparative Perspective
Juvenile Justice refers to the legal system designed for children (usually under 18 years) who commit crimes. It differs from adult criminal justice in aims and procedures, focusing on:
Rehabilitation and reform over punishment
Special protections recognizing the developmental status of children
Separate courts and detention facilities
Key Features of Juvenile Justice Across Jurisdictions
| Feature | India | United States | United Kingdom |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age of Juvenile | Below 18 years | Below 18 years (varies by state) | Below 18 years |
| Focus | Rehabilitation, social reintegration | Punishment + rehabilitation | Rehabilitation + welfare |
| Special Courts | Juvenile Justice Boards | Juvenile Courts | Youth Courts |
| Detention Facilities | Juvenile homes, Observation homes | Juvenile detention centers | Secure children's homes |
| Handling Serious Offenses | Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection Act amended for 16-18 yrs) | Can be tried as adults in some cases | Similar reforms with adult trials in severe cases |
Important Cases on Juvenile Justice
1. In re Gault, 1967 (U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
Gerald Gault, a 15-year-old, was sentenced to a juvenile detention facility without proper legal procedure.
Issue:
Whether juveniles have the right to due process (notice, counsel, hearing) in delinquency proceedings.
Judgment:
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that juveniles have constitutional rights similar to adults, including the right to notice of charges, right to counsel, right to confront witnesses, and protection against self-incrimination.
Significance:
Landmark case expanding procedural rights for juveniles.
Established that juveniles are entitled to fair trials and legal safeguards.
Emphasized that juvenile justice is not a "playground for whims of authorities."
2. Sheela Barse v. Union of India (1986) (India)
Facts:
This case addressed the treatment and conditions of juveniles in adult prisons in India.
Issue:
Whether juveniles could be detained in adult jails and what safeguards are necessary for their protection.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court ruled juveniles should never be kept in adult jails. It emphasized separate juvenile homes and mandated that juvenile prisoners must be treated differently.
Significance:
Strengthened protection of juveniles in custody.
Promoted the principle of segregation from adult offenders.
Highlighted the need for reformative treatment.
3. Roper v. Simmons, 2005 (U.S. Supreme Court)
Facts:
Christopher Simmons was sentenced to death for a crime committed at age 17.
Issue:
Whether imposing the death penalty on offenders under 18 violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Judgment:
The Court ruled that executing juveniles is unconstitutional and prohibited the death penalty for crimes committed by minors.
Significance:
A major victory for juvenile rights worldwide.
Recognized that children have diminished culpability.
Highlighted the global trend against harsh punishments for juveniles.
4. Laxmi Mandal v. Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital (2018) (India)
Facts:
This case dealt with the welfare and rehabilitation of juveniles in conflict with the law, focusing on health and education rights.
Issue:
What are the obligations of the State regarding the care, education, and rehabilitation of juveniles?
Judgment:
The Court emphasized the State’s responsibility to provide comprehensive rehabilitation, including education, health care, and psychological support for juveniles.
Significance:
Reinforced the welfare model of juvenile justice.
Emphasized holistic care beyond mere detention.
Highlighted State’s duty in reintegration.
5. Nash v. State (U.K.)
Facts:
This case concerned the trial of a juvenile (16 years old) for serious violent crimes.
Issue:
Whether juveniles should be tried in adult courts or special youth courts.
Judgment:
The U.K. courts allowed certain serious juvenile offenders to be tried in adult courts but stressed the need for special safeguards during the trial and sentencing.
Significance:
Balances rehabilitation with accountability.
Reflects a pragmatic approach to juvenile justice.
Shows how different jurisdictions weigh public safety and juvenile rights.
Summary: Comparative Insights
| Jurisdiction | Focus on Juvenile Justice | Key Case Highlight |
|---|---|---|
| India | Rehabilitation, separate juvenile courts | Sheela Barse v. Union of India (1986) - separate custody for juveniles |
| USA | Constitutional protections, due process | In re Gault (1967) - due process for juveniles; Roper v. Simmons (2005) - no death penalty for juveniles |
| UK | Welfare-based, with exceptions for serious crimes | Nash v. State - trial of juveniles in adult courts with safeguards |
Important Principles in Juvenile Justice
Best Interest of the Child: The paramount consideration.
Separate Treatment: Juveniles must be kept separate from adults.
Rehabilitation over Punishment: Focus on reforming behavior.
Due Process Rights: Legal safeguards are essential.
Age Consideration: Developmental capacity influences culpability and sentencing.
RELATED Blog
0 comments