Juvenile Criminal Justice System

 Introduction

            There is a debatable issue in the criminal justice system on the age at which a young person should be held accountable for the criminal behaviors.  Though it is clear that adults and young people have distinct special needs, there are issues and challenges in determining the age of criminal responsibility.  In addressing these problems and deciding issues, the U.S Supreme Court is applying the international opinion. The international law has a proper meaning in the interpretation of U.S constitutional mandate. Overall, U.S should set a minimum age of criminal responsibility and utilize the international law such as Child Rights International Network where it will learn more about the sentencing of children.

 There are psychosocial factors that influence adolescent's maturity and ethical development. These psychosocial factors influence the ability to make decisions such as committing antisocial acts. The first factor is responsibility- this encompasses self-reliance, self-esteem and independence and the ability to be responsible and accountable for one's behavior. The second psychosocial factor is perspective-this comprise the ability of the adolescents to view the situation from a different perspective, making long-term planning and considering the consequences of an action. The third factor is temperance- this comprises the ability to avoid impulsive actions and having a higher level of self-control (Cauffman & Steinberg, 2000).  In the criminal justice system, it is important to consider these psychosocial elements to reach a ‘maturity judgment.'  Rather than focusing on age alone, it is important to consider responsibility, perspective, and temperance since they influence both social and antisocial decision-making.

 There should be an across-the-board age limit for criminal responsibility. The role of age limit for criminal responsibility is to create productive members of the community through providing them with successful rehabilitation and allowing them to engage in the community service opportunities (Cipriani, 2016).   For example, if the age limit is raised to 17 or 18 years old,   it means that the juvenile orders aged 18 years and below will be rehabilitated thereby reduce recidivism, increase economic productivity and reduce the costs of law enforcement. Conversely, the case-by-case basis will mean that there will be no age limit and young offenders will be imprisoned in the adult prisons thereby denying them the employment and education opportunities.  There is also a probability that the juvenile will commit suicide due to physical abuse.  Thus, it is important to establishing the age limit for delinquency jurisdiction.  It is also important to consider the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that there should be moral considerations for all people (Cipriani, 2016). The international juvenile justice standards also offer greater details based on children's rights and protection.

  The ‘international opinion' should influence the decisions of the US Supreme Court.  Referring to the 2005 case of Rover v. Simmons, the Supreme Court applied the foreign laws and the international opinion to decide whether the offenders who were under the age of eighteen were subject to the death penalty.  Concerning the case and other cases, the Supreme Court should use foreign sources in making decision-based on the national matters or in other words, the ‘international opinion' should influence the decision making. It is important to use the international practices and adopting the appropriate measures for the United Sets (Sidlow & Henschen, 2007). The international opinions serve a significant purpose in shaping the undressing of the issue.  Besides, it is important to consider the international opinions when interpreting the constitution since there will be an ‘international consensus' which comprise the majority opinion on issues affecting the human race (Sidlow & Henschen, 2007).  It is important to note that there is no binding law or a binding contract but, the purpose of using the international opinion is to find the majority opinion or the consensus on national matters such as death penalty.

 

 

Juvenile court procedure in South Africa

 According to the Child Justice Act 2008, a person under the age of 10 is not responsible for criminal acts and cannot be prosecuted.  A person who is aged 10-14 years lack criminal capacity and in case of accusation, it is the role of the probation officer to assess the child to determine whether he or she understands what is right and wrong.  A person aged 14-16 years should be imprisoned under these conditions; if the bail has been denied,  if the child commits a serious offense such as murder,  if the imprisonment promotes the public safety and if the issued a certificate with sufficient evinced for the imprisonment (Skelton & Tshehla, 2008).  The juvenile justice system has a diversion program which comprises thing such as a family time order, a good behavior order and a reporting order. 

   There are important aspects of the South African juvenile system that the U.S should adopt to improve its system.  U.S juvenile system faces numerous challenges since the majority of the children in the juvenile justice system suffer from mental problems and emotional issues. To address this problem, it is important to re-establish or reform the diversion programs to promote reconciliation and reintegrating the young offenders to the family and community (Skelton & Tshehla, 2008).  In addition, rather than incarcerated the young people, U.S should provide community-based services to meet the unique challenge and help the offenders improve the mental health.  Besides, U.S should shift to restorative justice which is based on forming a reconciliation between the victim and the family or community (Skelton & Tshehla, 2008).  Rather than using a punitive approach which contributes to negative consequences such mental disorder, it is important to focus on addressing the psychological needs of the young offenders.

 

 

Conclusion

  Juvenile criminal justice system plays a significant role in protecting the community from crime, promoting youth development and rehabilitating the young offenders to prevent future crime. However, there is a dilemma facing the juvenile justice system in determining the age of criminal responsibility.  Before setting the age limit, it is essential to consider the factors that influence maturity and ethical development.  After understanding the age at which child develop moral reasoning, it will be easier to set a minimum age of responsibility.  It is also essential to apply the foreign laws or international human rights for guidance.

 

 

 

 

References

 

Cauffman, E., & Steinberg, L. (2000). (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: why adolescents may be

less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 18(6), 741-760.

 

 

 Cipriani Don. (2016). Children’s Rights and the Minimum Age of Criminal Reasonability: A Global

Perspective.  Routledge

 

Sidlow, E., & Henschen, B. (2007). America at odds. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

 

 

Skelton, A., & Tshehla, B. (2008). Child justice in South Africa. Pretoria, South Africa: Institute for

Security Studies.