More handpicked essays just for you.
Aspects of criminal justice system
Criminal justice system and administration
Criminal justice system and administration
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The NSW Criminal Justice System is adequate when dealing with young offenders; however, like any legal system it does have its limitations. The NSW Criminal justice system does uphold the rights of the young offender by providing juveniles with special courts under the Childrens Court Act 1987 (NSW) by providing special protections under the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child; the recognising of culpability in regards to the age of the young offender by implementing doli incapax and by arranging a variety of diversionary programs and alternative punishments. However, the limitations of the NSW Criminal justice system in relation to young offenders is Doli Incapax in the The Childrens (Criminal Proceedings Act 1987) NSW which fails to recognise more serious offenders and The Young Offenders Act allowance for youth justice conferencing is not being cultivated for a wide enough range of offenders, leading the exclusion of some young offenders from the benefits that conferencing can offer.
The law generally recognises that children and young people require some exclusive protections when dealing with police; by complying with the UN’s Convention of the Rights of the Child (CROC) and through the following the requirements for police in their dealings with young offenders outlined in the Law Enforcements (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) (LEPRA). CROC provides the foundations for upholding the rights of young offenders with the four guiding principles of non-discrimination, the best interests of the offender being maintained, survival and development and lastly participation in the decision making process. Having these measures implemented in the NSW Criminal Justice System ensures that the offender’s rights are main...
... middle of paper ...
...phasises to the NSW criminal justice system that different levels of maturity by giving onus to the prosecution to prove the offender had acknowledged the act that he/she was committing was a crime. This understanding from the NSW criminal justice systems helped protect the young offender from being reprimanded for an act they truly didn’t comprehend to be criminal/illegal and ensures that the prosecution has sufficient evidence to prosecute the offender therefore ensuring that offenders of the ages 10 -14 are not unfairly treated and also take into the criminal justice systems obligations to CROC by keeping the best interest of the young offender a priority.
The Young Offenders Act aims to allow for youth justice conferencing, which can be option to be used when a young offender admits to an offence and consents to this method of dealing with the offence at hand.
The purpose of this report is to provide the courts and judges in the matter of Martin A. case an overview and critical analysis of his case through the evaluation process of Youth Court Action Planning Plan (YCAPP). Before discussing Martin A., it is a good idea to understand the roles and functions of the YCAPP. Over the course of history, the Canadian legal system has always struggled with successfully dealing with youth offenders until the introduction of youth criminal justice act in 2003. Youth criminal justice act has reduced the number of cases, charges, and convictions against the youth hence resulting in a much more efficient way to deal with youth crime across the country (Department of justice, 2017). A vital component
The focus of the juvenile justice system is to rehabilitate juvenile offenders, rather than to imprison and punish like the systems adult counterpart. According to Caldwell (1961) the juvenile justice system is based on the principle that youth are developmentally and fundamentally different from adults. This has lead to the development of a separate justice system for juveniles that was initially designed to assist troubled juveniles providing them with protection, treatment, and guidance. When performing as it is designed and up to the initial intentions, the juvenile court balances rehabilitation (treatment) of the offender with suitable sanctions when necessary such as incarceration. According to Mack (1909) the focus of the juvenile justice system has shifted from “how can we help the child”, “why did the child commit the crime” to “was the crime committed”. According to Griffin (2008) in some cases juveniles may be required to be “transferred” to adult court. The prerequisites for transfer to adult court are the duty to protect the public from violent youths, serious crime, and the lack of rehabilitation chance from the juvenile court. According to Flesch (2004) many jurisdictions handle the issue of serious juvenile crime by charging juveniles as adults. Charging a juvenile as an adult is done by a method which is called waiver to adult court. This waiver allows adult criminal court to have the power to exercise jurisdiction over juveniles and handle the juvenile’s case as an adult’s case would be tried. According to Flesch (2004) a juvenile is both tried and if convicted of the crime the juvenile will be sentenced as an adult when his or her case is waived from the juvenile court. Waiver to adult court initially was viewe...
Youth crime is a growing epidemic that affects most teenagers at one point in their life. There is no question in society to whether or not youths are committing crimes. It has been shown that since 1986 to 1998 violent crime committed by youth jumped approximately 120% (CITE). The most controversial debate in Canadian history would have to be about the Young Offenders Act (YOA). In 1982, Parliament passed the Young Offenders Act (YOA). Effective since 1984, the Young Offenders Act replaced the most recent version of the Juvenile Delinquents Act (JDA). The Young Offenders Act’s purpose was to shift from a social welfare approach to making youth take responsibility for their actions. It also addressed concerns that the paternalistic treatment of children under the JDA did not conform to Canadian human rights legislation (Mapleleaf). It remained a heated debate until the new legislation passed the Youth Criminal Justice Act. Some thought a complete overhaul was needed, others thought minor changes would suffice, and still others felt that the Young Offenders Act was best left alone.
Allerton, M, Butler, T, Champion, U & Kenny, D 2003, 2003 NSW Young People in Custody Health Survey: A Summary of Some Key Findings. Australian Institute of Criminology, [Online]. Available at: http://aic.gov.au/events/aic%20upcoming%20events/2003/~/media/conferences/2003-juvenile/kenny.ashx, [Accessed 14 April 2011].
People have, not too long ago, realized that youth and adults are very diverse and should not be treated the same. They gave no time for children to develop the “meins reis”, therefore, they were not given the opportunity to learn. People were not aware that the brain of the youth were not fully developed and were not given the chance of change. They thought that once guilty you shall remain guilty. For that reason they were considered adults, when in reality, adult criminals will only continue to infatuate their mind with evil. The new Youth Criminal Justice Act focuses on change and reintegration with society. We have learned that the youth have not fully developed and do not have the full ability to comprehend such judgements.
When thinking about youth crime do you envision a country with a high rate of young offenders, gang activity and re-offending? Or do you envision a country with a significant increase of young offenders either being successfully reintegrated into society, or helped by a community when seeking forgiveness for a minor offence that they have committed? Since the passing of Bill C-7 or the Youth Criminal Justice Act on February 4, 2002 by the House of Commons, many significant improvements have been made in Canada’s youth criminal justice system on how to handle and care for young offenders. Some of the reasons why Bill C-7 was passed in Canada was because the bill before it, Young Offenders Act, had many problems and suffered large amounts scrutiny by Canadian Citizens. It’s because of these reasons that Bill C-7 had been revised multiple times before being passed, having previously been called Bill C-68, March of 1999 and Bill C-3, in October 1999. With this all being said, many Canadian citizens are still left to ponder a question of if there is even significant improvement in our Youth Criminal justice system when comparing the Youth Criminal Justice Act to the Young Offenders Act? In my opinion, there are many significant improvements that have been made in the Youth Criminal Justice Act which have aided our justice system. By addressing the weaknesses of the Young Offenders Act, the Youth Criminal Justice Act has helped Canada improve in the field of youth criminal justice by implementing better Extrajudicial Measures, ensuring effective reintegration of a young person once released from custody and providing much more clarification on sentencing options.
Most young offenders get into trouble with the law only once. But the younger children are when they first break the law, the more likely they are to break the law again (Statistics Canada study, 2005). The Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) attempts to acknowledge that different youth need different sentences within the justice system, while ensuring that it is fair and equitable for them. Many people, both in Canada, and around the world, believe that youth are not reprimanded harshly enough for the crimes they commit and that they are, in general, are able to squeeze through the justice system without punishment. Others, believe that the justice system does not treat youth fairly and punishes them without acknowledging that rehabilitation
...ing beckoned in with the 21st century. While U.S.’s JLWOP laws are inconsistent with many human rights treatises and with international law, it is more important for our policies to be based on a thorough understanding of the issue- the most essential being a separation of the processes for juvenile and adult criminal offenders. With an emphasis on rehabilitation for juvenile offenders, and the goal of encouraging maturity and personal development after wayward actions, the futures of many teens in the criminal justice system can become much more hopeful.
The YCJA teaches youth that their actions were unacceptable but there will still be consequences without giving them heavy jail time. One way that the government does this is through “conferencing”. Conferencing allows youth to participate in a program with the victim and the victim’s family members to learn about the consequences of their behavior and to develop ways to make amends. Typically, a conference would bring together in an informal setting the offender, his or her family, the victim, and the victim’s supporters. An open discussion about the offence and its impact would then begin with a resolution being determined at the end a simple apology might even be the end result. The idea of conferencing came from family group conferencing practiced in New Zealand and Australia as well as aboriginal circle sentencing. In 1997, the House of Commons Justice Committee suggested that the youth criminal justice system adopt conferencing as a sentencing option. Conferencing is highly beneficial to the offender because it gives them an opportunity to see first ...
June/July 21-26. Eldelfonso, Edward. A. Law Enforcement and the Youth offenders: Juvenile Procedures. New York: Wiley, 1967. Hyde, Margaret O. & Co.
Youth and juvenile crime is a common and serious issue in current society, and people, especially parents and educators, are pretty worried about the trend of this problem. According to Bala and Roberts, around 17% of criminals were youths, compared to 8% of Canadian population ranging between 12 to 18 years of age between 2003 and 2004 (2006, p37). As a big federal country, Canada has taken a series of actions since 1908. So far, there are three justice acts in the history of Canadian juvenile justice system, the 1908 Juvenile Delinquents Act, the 1982 Young Offenders Act, and the 2003 Youth Criminal Justice Act. In Canada, the judicial system and the principle of these laws have been debated for a long time. This paper will discuss how these three laws were defined and why one was replaced by another.
In today’s society it is not who or whom it is what. Juvenile offenders are now facing a two court system, not only can they be tried in juvenile court for a crime committed. They are now being charged as adults in adult court. Charging a juvenile as an adult has stirred up ...
When considering the idea of trying and sentencing juveniles as adults, it is important to know exactly what these procedures may entail. Amnesty International, a human rights group, found that Juveniles are often subjected to physical and sexual abuses while in detention (World: Americas Amnesty Says US Jails Too Many Children). An environment like this is far too hostile and dangerous for children. Not only does this environment bring on more punishment than needed, it is a major violation of human righ...
Stokes, D. 2004. Submission to the Youth Justice Agency. [Online] Available from: www.youthreach.ie [Accessed 7th May 2012]
Firstly in this report, I will be giving the different definitions of rule of law by different philosophers; secondly, I will be applying the rule of law to the English Legal system and thirdly I will be explaining separation of powers with a focus on the impartial judiciary. Finally, I will be using cases to support every detailed point given.