The Different Aspects Of The YCJA

The relevant legislation that has been implemented, (Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987), has addressed issues that young people face. However, rights for young people still need to be addressed. Doli Incapax, The Children’s Court and Legal are measures taken to protect young offenders in regards to the criminal justice system. Ensuring that the child’s rights are protected there have been legislations passed to guarantee the enforceability of this alternative methods. Young people are treated differently to adults in the criminal justice system for three major reasons. They are; they prevent children and young people from being exploited, protect them from making uniformed decisions and protect others from being disadvantaged by dealing with a person that is a

Young offenders are recognised under the law to have a different level of responsibility and vulnerability to adult offenders. This creates tension in the community, as when children are not protected in criminal procedures, their rights are not upheld. This is demonstrated in R V Phung and Huynh [2001] NSWSC 115, where the accused was detained without the contact of his guardian of choice for over several hours, was not consulted on whom he preferred as a support person and was not given a lawyer. This creates tension as the child did not receive the criteria assigned under the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW) and was without a legal representative, defying the fairness of his case. However, the judge deemed the evidence provided from interviews as inadmissible due to his rights being denied. The courts attempt to prevent the tension from the community by using the judge’s discretion in determining what evidence is

The Youth Justice System deals with 12-17 year olds in trouble with the law. It uses a rehabilitative method to deal with youth. It makes sure the youth are provided with meaningful consequences for their actions and then reintegrates them back into society. The Youth Justice System brings up a lot of question and the main one is: Is Canada’s Youth Justice System fair and equitable? A lot of people argue that it is too lenient while others say it is a great method for dealing with youth. The Youth Justice system is fair and equitable; it uses a rehabilitative method that helps reintegrate youth back into society as normal functioning citizens. Young people deserve a different criminal code than adults because they are in the course of

New Labour youth justice policy and practice over the past decades have been deep-rooted in an ideological framework. That incorporates criminological theoretical both neo-liberal approaches in regarding young people who commit offences, that has become responsibility for the management of risk, and less tolerant of indiscipline more overtly in society (Muncie, 2008). Likewise neo-conservative ideologies that involves of left realisation of policy and reintegrative shaming. Whereby the offending activities of the individual are shamed with the punishment that suit the crime, however at the same time take in consideration the circumstances whereby the individual commit the offence (Hopkins Burke, 2008). Increasingly, in United Kingdom there have been a culture of fear which surrounding the youths in society influences in part by cases such as the murder of two year old James Bulger committed by ten year olds Robert Thompson and Jon Venables in 1992 as the contributing factors (Pitts,2001).

Sentencing youth offenders has a different criterion then sentencing an adult as the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) has a set of principles and guidelines, which judges must follow. Sentencing is a process where a youth is either found guilty or has pleaded guilty and a judge will decide on an appropriate consequence (Justice Education Society, 2017). The process ensures youth are held accountable for their actions, focusing on a rehabilitative, or reintegrated approach. There are many ways a youth offender can be sentenced. Section 42(2) of the YCJA defines and explains sentencing options for youth offenders.

The criminal justice system approaches young offenders through unique policies to address the challenges of dealing with juvenile offending. They take special care when dealing with juveniles in order to stop them from repeat offending and stop any potential bad behaviour which could result in future. Juveniles have the highest tendency to rehabilitate and most adopt law-abiding lifestyles as they mature. There are several factors influencing juvenile crime including psychological and social pressures unique to juveniles, which may lead to an increase in juvenile’s risks of contact with the criminal justice system.

Youth crime is a tough issue, with many differing opinions. Punishment and rehabilitation, one, the other, or both, all topics of debate within society. If you were to discuss the issues with the parents of a victim, it would be understandable that their opinions would differ greatly than those of the parents of the offender. Many people have formed an opinion without an in depth look at the act. Others simply do not care.

There are many similarities and differences between the adult and juvenile justice systems. Although juvenile crimes have increased in violence and intensity in the last decade, there is still enough difference between the two legal proceedings, and the behaviors themselves, to keep the systems separated. There is room for changes in each structure. However, we cannot treat/punish juvenile offenders the way we do adult offenders, and vice versa. This much we know. So we have to find a way to merge between the two. And, let’s face it; our juveniles are more important to us in the justice system. They are the group at they

The Youth Criminal Justice Act is the law that helps govern youth offenders in Canada, which has been created to introduce a overall fair and equitable method to deal with youth criminal offenders but could use further improvements. This act applies to youth between the ages of 12 and 17 and who have taken an offensive action against the law. Over the century there have been 3 youth justice statutes; the Juvenile Delinquents Act (1908-1984), the Young Offenders Act (YOA) (1984-2003), and the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA) (2003-present). Significant changes were made to the act to make it much more fair and straight to the point. Changes such as the useage of courts in non-serious cases, fairness in sentencing, and lack of effective interrogation.

In the same fashion that a gardener does not deem some flowers worthy of their attention, the YCJA does not aim for inequitably. In fact, the Youth Criminal Justice Act is an exceptionally fair and equitable system. Each and every case brought to the YCJA is analyzed individually. As a matter of fact, the judge even takes the time to examine every youth offender’s circumstances. For instance, a homeless child stealing from a store could be punished differently than a wealthy child stealing from the

The need to protect children and youth; to treat them separately and differently from adults in the criminal justice system; to provide rehabilitation, not repression and deterrence, when offering judicial intervention with young people; and to consider the best interest of the child to be a guiding principle (p34)

("UK | Youth Justice: How It Works." BBC News. BBC, 23 Aug. 2001. Web. 28 Mar. 2017.)

Young people represent the future of society. Consequently, they deserve respect and support while they develop in order to maintain a fair and just society. Therefore, it is the juvenile justice system’s responsibility to establish institutions and legislation to protect the important role that young people play in society. The system should also be driven by welfare and justice concerns as young people have special needs in regards to their age, and their physical, emotional and social development. It is essential that these welfare and justice concerns are addressed effectively by the system in order for young people to flourish. This essay will firstly assess the NSW juvenile justice system in regards to its treatment of young offenders in detention, in conjunction with its obligations under domestic and international law. Additionally, this essay will analyse evidence of welfare and justice concerns for youth offenders in detention in NSW. And furthermore, this essay will analyse the implications of youth detention on young offender’s and society. And ultimately argue that the NSW contemporary juvenile justice system is not driven by welfare and justice concerns. Given the fact that NSW has the highest rate of youth detention in Australia, and that there is overwhelming evidence to support the idea that youth detention carries detrimental physical and psychological consequences. Furthermore, the NSW juvenile justice system is not upholding the fact that young people

This essay aims to make clear the system of restorative justice and its aims towards youth offending, whilst arguing points for and against the current system and whether or not it is more appropriate in terms of dealing with youth offending. It will also define restorative justice as well as defining what is meant by conventional justice. Making clear how and why these two systems came to be a part of youth justice whilst concluding as to which if either is more appropriate in dealing with youth offending behaviour.

Serious crimes such as murder, burglary and rape have raised questions as to whether the young offenders should face severe punitive treatment or the normal punitive measures in juvenile courts. Many would prefer the juveniles given harsh punishment in order to discourage other young people from engaging in similar activities and to serve as a lesson to these particular offenders. However, results from previous studies indicate such punitive measures were neither successful nor morally acceptable. Instead, the solutions achieved have unfairly treated the youths and compromised the society status (Kristin, page 1).