Young people, crime and justice in Northern Ireland

Many children and young people in conflict with the law in Northern Ireland have experienced living in poverty, truancy or exclusion from school, limited educational attainment, neglect or abuse within their families, placement in alternative care, drug or alcohol misuse, physical and mental ill-health. However, their lives are also affected by the legacy and particular circumstances of a society in transition from conflict. In addition to historical under-investment in services for children and their families, this includes discriminatory policing alongside informal regulation by ‘paramilitaries’ or members of ‘the community’ and community-based restorative justice schemes as an alternative way of dealing with low-level crime and ‘anti-social’ behaviour.

Following a Criminal Justice Review, the 2002 Justice (Northern Ireland) Act affirmed that the principal aim of the youth justice system is to protect the public by preventing offending by children’. Youth justice initiatives therefore encompass a range of responses: early intervention to prevent offending and the application of civil Anti-Social Behaviour Orders, diversionary measures (including community-based restorative justice schemes), non-custodial disposals for those found guilty of offences, and custodial sentences. While ‘policy transfer’ prevailed during periods of ‘direct rule’ from Westminster, the punitive responses to ‘sub-criminal’ and ‘anti-social’ behaviour introduced by the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act in England and Wales were resisted or not implemented in the same way in Northern Ireland.

This Chapter will critically analyse the debates informing recent developments, noting key issues raised by the 2011 review of youth justice initiated as a priority following the devolution of justice and policing to the Northern Ireland Assembly. It will focus on promotion and protection of the rights of children and young people in conflict with the law.

Experiences of youth justice: Youth justice discourses and their multiple effects

Interventions within youth justice systems draw on a range of rationales and philosophies. Traditionally demarcated by a welfare/justice binary, the complex array of contemporary rationales meld different philosophies and practices, suggesting a mutability that gives this sphere a continued (re)productive and felt effect. While it may be increasingly difficult to ascertain which of these discourses is dominant in different jurisdictions in the UK, particular models of justice are perceived to be more prominent (Muncie, 2006). Traditionally it is assumed that Northern Ireland prioritises restoration, Wales prioritises rights, England priorities risk and Scotland welfare (McVie, 2011; Muncie, 2008, 2011). However, how these discourses are enacted in practice, how multiple and competing rationales circulate within them and most fundamentally how they are experienced by young people is less clear. This paper, based on research with young people who have experienced the full range of interventions in the youth justice system in Northern Ireland examines their narratives of ‘justice’. It considers how different discourses might influence the same intervention and how the deployment of multiple rationalities gives the experience of ‘justice’ its effect.

Realising Justice for victims before the International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been celebrated for its innovative victim provisions, which enable victims to participate in proceedings, avail of protection measures and assistance, and to claim reparations. The impetus for incorporating victim provisions within the ICC, came from victims’ dissatisfaction with the ad hoc tribunals in providing them with more meaningful and tangible justice.1 The International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTY/R) only included victim protection measures, with no provisions for victims to participate in proceedings nor to claim reparations at them. Developments in domestic and international law, in particular human rights such as the 1985 UN Declaration on Justice for Victims and the UN Guidelines on Remedy and Reparations, and transitional justice mechanisms, such as truth commissions and reparations bodies, have helped to expand the notion of justice for international crimes to be more attuned to victims as key stakeholders in dealing with such crimes.

With the first convictions secured at the ICC and the victim participation and reparation regime taking form, it is worth evaluating the extent to which these innovative provisions have translated into justice for victims. The first part of this paper outlines what justice for victims of international crimes entails, drawing from victimology and human rights. The second section surveys the extent to which the ICC has incorporated justice for victims, in procedural and substantive terms, before concluding in looking beyond the Court to how state parties can complement the ICC in achieving justice for victims. This paper argues that while much progress has been made to institutionalise justice for victims within the Court, there is much more progress needed to evolve and develop justice for victims within the ICC to avoid dissatisfaction of past tribunals.

The Participation of Disabled Children and Young People: A Social Justice Perspective

There is an increasing expectation that children, young people and their parents should participate in decisions that affect them. This includes decisions about their health and social care and collective or public decisions about the way in which such services are designed, delivered and evaluated. Indeed this has become a policy priority across the United Kingdom. The participation of disabled children and young people, however, has been slow to develop in the United Kingdom and concerns have been expressed about progress in this area. Drawing on the results of an Economic and Social Research Council-funded, mixed-methods study, the aim of this article is to explore the participation of disabled children and young people through a social justice lens. Participants, recruited by purposeful sampling, included 18 disabled children and young people, 77 parents and 90 professionals from one health and social care trust in Northern Ireland. There were four phases of data collection: surveys to parents and professionals, parent interviews, interviews with children and young people using creative and participatory techniques, and a focus group with professionals. Results showed that for most disabled children and young people, decision-making was firmly grounded in a family-centred model. However, when children and young people were drawn into participatory processes by adults and recognised as partners in interactions with professionals, they wanted more say and were more confident about expressing their views. Choices, information and resources were at times limited and this had a key impact on participation and the lives of these children, young people and their parents. The article concludes by exploring implications for further research and practice. The need for a two-pronged, social justice approach is recommended as a mechanism to advance the participation agenda.

Restorative Justice and Sex Offending

This essay examines the origins and uses of restorative justice with sexual offending and the contemporary challenges and controversies surrounding this. It charts the range of ad hoc initiatives which have sought to apply a restorative form of intervention with violent or sexual offending from first time and ‘acquaintance’ rape as well as young sexual abusers to high risk sexual offenders in the form of circles of support and accountability. Such schemes are often presented as a counter to the failings of retributive forms of justice and are premised on Braithwaite’s (1989) notion of ‘reintegrative shaming’ that seek to reintegrate offenders into the community. Critics of restorative justice traditionally put forward a number of core objectives when restorative justice is applied to serious forms of offending such as sexual offending. The essay also sets out and seeks to counter these principal challenges and how they may be overcome. For the most part, however, restorative justice has failed to reach its potential as a fully fledged sentencing rationale in being applied as a mainstream response to a wide range of offending including that at the higher end of the spectrum. The essay also seeks to examine barriers to restorative justice within contemporary penal policy and to highlight some of the most controversial applications of the restorative paradigm including those related to clergy sexual abuse. It concludes by offering some thoughts on the future of restorative justice as a mainstream responses to serious forms of offending.

Elaborating Justice for Victims at the International Criminal Court: Beyond Rhetoric and the Hague

Justice for victims has often been invoked as the raison d’être of international criminal justice, by punishing perpetrators of international crimes. This article attempts to provide a more holistic account of justice for victims by examining victims’ needs, interests, and rights. The International Criminal Court itself includes participation, protection and reparation for victims, indicating they are important stakeholders. This article also suggests that victims are integral to the purpose of the ICC in ending impunity by ensuring transparency of proceedings. However, there are limits to the resources and capacity of the ICC, which can only investigate and prosecute selected crimes. To overcome this justice gap, this article directs the debate towards a victim-orientated agenda to complementarity, where state parties and the Assembly of State Parties should play a greater role in implementing justice for victims domestically. This victim-orientated complementarity approach can be achieved through new ASP guidelines on complementarity, expanding universal jurisdiction, or seeking enforcement and cooperation through regional and international bodies and courts, such asUniversal Periodic Review or the African Court’s International Criminal Law Section. In the end, ifwe are serious about delivering justice for victims we need to move beyond the rhetoric, with realistic expectations of what the ICC can achieve, and concentrate our attention to what states should bedoing to end impunity.

Transitional justice, demobilization, and peacebuilding amid political violence: Examining individual preferences in the Caribbean coast of Colombia

The conventional wisdom in the transitional justice literature is that there is no one-size-fits-all approach. This article suggests that this may also be true within a given state. The current paper reports on quantitative and qualitative data from 184 participants in a survey conducted in the Caribbean coast of Colombia. Results suggest widespread support for transitional justice mechanisms – such as perpetrator accountability, public acknowledgement and structural change – but dissatisfaction with national-level initiatives, specifically the 2005 Justice and Peace Law. Yet, despite a distrust of the national government and protracted conflict, individuals report social trust, community cohesion and reliance on local government institutions. These attitudes and behaviours suggest that decentralised transitional justice mechanisms may be more effective in meeting victims' needs. Moreover, analyses indicate that individual preferences are influenced by community factors, such as the presence of demobilised paramilitaries, which can be addressed through more localised approaches to promote peacebuilding. The paper concludes with best practices derived from the findings.