Indigenous Youth Justice Programs Evaluation

Diversion from the youth justice system is a critical goal for addressing the overrepresentation of Indigenous young people in the criminal justice system. In this report, four programs that were already being implemented by states and territories and identified by them under the National Indigenous Law & Justice Framework as promising practice in diversion are examined. The programs were evaluated, as part of a broader initiative, to determine whether and on what basis they represent good practice (ie are supported by evidence). State and territory governments nominated the programs for evaluation.

Review of 'Laying Down the Criminal Law : A Handbook for Youth Workers'

This third edition of Laying down the criminal law: A handbook for youth workers is essential to understanding young people’s experiences with criminal justice in Queensland. The text comprises detailed scenarios of situations where a young person would have contact with the system, and young people ‘in trouble’ (for example, being excluded from school). The text discusses how workers support the young person in talking to police, going to court, or being a victim of crime. One scenario notes how a youth worker responds to 15 year old Stephen staying at a youth shelter after leaving home and having contact with police. Scenarios are supplemented with information about confidentiality and negligence, and how workers consider these concepts supporting young people...

The Globalisation of Crime Control: The Case of Youth and Juvenille Justice

The concept of globalization has gradually permeated criminology, but more so as applied to transnational organized crime, international terrorism and policing than in addressing processes of criminal justice reform. Based on a wide range of bibliographic and web resources, this article assesses the extent to which a combination of neo-liberal assaults on the social logics of the welfare state and public provision, widespread experimentation with restorative justice and the prospect of rehabilitation through mediation and widely ratified international directives, epitomized by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, have now made it possible to talk of a global juvenile/youth justice. Conversely it also reflects on how persistent national and local divergences, together with the contradictions of contemporary reform, may preclude any aspiration for the delivery of a universal and consensual product

Illusions of Difference: Comparative Youth Justice in the Devolved UK

Surprisingly, there has been little or no systematic research to date that has explored the significance of UK devolution for youth justice policy and practice. This article explores the extent of differential justice in the United Kingdom, particularly as it is expressed in the myriad action plans, criminal justice reviews, frameworks for action, delivery plans and offending strategies that have surfaced since 1998. In particular, the article considers how far policy convergence and divergence are reflected through the discourses of risk, welfare, restoration and children's rights in the four administrations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. For comparative criminology, the United Kingdom offers a unique opportunity to explore how international and national pressures towards convergence and/or divergence can be challenged, rebranded, versioned, adapted or resisted at sub-national and local levels.

Submission to the Queensland Department of Communities Review of the Juvenile Justices Act 1992 Issues Paper 2007

This submission addresses the Queensland Government’s Department of Communities Issues Paper regarding the Review of the Juvenile Justice Act 1992 (August 2007). The Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Law has a Criminal Justice Program within the Law and Justice Research Centre. The members of this Program wish to participate in the debate on these issues which are critically important to the Queensland community at large but especially to our young people.

Blurred lines : reconsidering the concept of ‘diversion’ in youth justice systems in Australia

This article revisits ‘diversion’ in the context of youth justice in Australia. Although ‘diversion’ is omnipresent in youth justice, it is rarely subject to critical examination. This article raises four interrelated questions: what young people are to be ‘diverted’ from and to; whether young people are to be ‘diverted’ from the criminal justice system or from offending; whether young people are to be ‘diverted’ from criminal justice processes or outcomes; and whether ‘diversion’ should be considered distinct from crime prevention and early intervention. The article concludes that the confusion about youth ‘diversion’ may foster individualised interventions in young people’s lives.

Submission to the Legal Affairs and Community Safety Committee Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill

This submission addresses the Youth Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 the objectives of which are to: 1. Permit repeat offenders’ identifying information to be published and open the Children’s Court for youth justice matters involving repeat offenders; 2. Create a new offence where a child commits a further offence while on bail; 3. Permit childhood findings of guilt for which no conviction was recorded to be admissible in court when sentencing a person for an adult offence; 4. Provide for the automatic transfer from detention to adult corrective services facilities of 17 year olds who have six months or more left to serve in detention; 5. Provide that, in sentencing any adult or child for an offence punishable by imprisonment, the court must not have regard to any principle, whether under statute or at law, that a sentence of imprisonment (in the case of an adult) or detention (in the case of a child) should only be imposed as a last resort; 6. Allow children who have absconded from Sentenced Youth Boot Camps to be arrested and brought before a court for resentencing without first being given a warning; and 7. Make a technical amendment to the Youth Justice Act 1992.

Making the fun stop : youth justice reform in Queensland

In 2013 the newly elected conservative Liberal National Party government instigated amendments to the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld). Boot camps replaced court ordered youth justice conferencing. In 2014 there were more drastic changes, including opening the Children’s Court proceedings to the public, permitting publication of identifying information of repeat offenders, removing the principle of ‘detention as a last resort’, facilitating prompt transferral of 17 year olds to adult prisons and instigating new bail offences and mandatory boot camp orders for recidivist motor vehicle offenders in Townsville. This article compares these amendments to the legislative frameworks in other jurisdictions and current social research. It argues that these amendments are out of step with national and international best practice benchmarks for youth justice. Early indications are that Indigenous children are now experiencing increased rates of unsentenced remand. The article argues that the government’s policy initiatives are resulting in negative outcomes and that early and extensive evaluations of these changes are essential.

Unspeakably present: The (un)acknowledgment of diverse sexuality and gender human rights in Australian youth justice systems

A number of international human rights frameworks protect the rights of young people in contact with the criminal justice system in states parties, including Australia. These frameworks inform youth justice policy in Australia’s jurisdictions. While the frameworks protect young people’s right to non-discrimination on the grounds of ‘race’, religion and political opinion, the rights of young people to non-discrimination on the grounds of sexuality and gender diversity are not explicitly protected. This is problematic given that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) young people appear over-represented in youth justice systems. This article argues that the exclusion of this group from human rights frameworks has an important flow-on effect: the marginalisation of the right of LGBTIQ young people to non-discrimination in policy and discourse that is informed by international human rights frameworks. After outlining the relevant frameworks, this article examines the evidence about LGBTIQ young people’s interactions with youth justice agencies, particularly police. The evidence indicates that the human rights of LGBTIQ young people are frequently breached in these interactions. We conclude by arguing that it is timely to consider how best to protect the human rights of LBGTIQ young people and keep their rights on the agenda.

‘The door creaked shut’: The new breach of bail offence for youth in Queensland

As part of the 2014 amendments to the Youth Justice Act 1992 (Qld) the previous Queensland government introduced a new breach of bail offence and a reverse onus provision in relation to the new offence. Also included in the raft of amendments was a provision removing the internationally accepted principle that, in relation to young offenders, detention should be used as ‘a last resort’. This article argues that these changes are likely to increase the entrenchment of young people within the criminal justice system.

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.

Experiencing Youth Justice: Process, Meaning and Legitimacy

Reform of the youth justice system, including the wide incorporation of restorative justice approaches, was a central component of the Criminal Justice Review (2000). Following the devolution of policing and justice powers to the Assembly, the Youth Justice Review (2011) made a series of recommendations for further reforms. These included proposals for the introduction of a statutory time limit in youth cases to tackle avoidable delay. Strengthening legitimacy and advancing rights-based approaches are key themes underpinning the recommendations of Youth Justice Review (2011). Young people’s views of justice within the system are critical to our understanding of how such aims can be achieved. This presentation is based on findings from a longitudinal qualitative study exploring young people’s experiences of transitions into and from custody in the Juvenile Justice Centre. Using a life-history approach young people’s experiences of justice at various stages of the criminal justice process and in the wider context of their lives is explored. Key issues such as social contexts, legitimacy and perceptions of fairness are highlighted and the implications of this for system reform are critically examined.

An examination of how youth understand their rights during the criminal process

In order for young people to meaningfully participate in the criminal justice system they must possess an understanding of their rights and legal procedures. To examine their understanding, 50 young people between the ages of 13-17 who received an extrajudicial sanction or were sentenced to probation, were recruited from the Finch Courthouse in Toronto, Ontario. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants regarding their understanding of their due process rights and their rights under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Youth who indicated involvement in plea bargaining were also asked about their experiences during this procedure. In addition, the present study examined youths' perceptions of power differences in their interactions with criminal justice officials working within an institution that has tremendous control over offenders' lives. The results indicate that while youth seem to have some understanding oftheir rights and legal procedures, they nevertheless feel ill-equipped to invoke their rights in an adult-led criminal justice system. Furthermore, while past literature has often conceptualized youth understanding based on age (e.g., Crawford & Bull, 2006) the findings of the present study demonstrate that while age plays some role, the lack of power experienced by youth vis-a-vis adults, and specifically criminal justice professionals, has the most bearing on the inability of youth to exercise their rights.

Show me a bad kid and I’ll show you a lousy parent : making parents responsible for youth crime in Australian and Canadian Contexts

This article surveys literature bearing on the issue of parental liability and responsibility for the crimes of young offenders, with a particular focus on comparing different approaches to dealing with the issue in Australia and Canada. This comparative analysis of Australian and Canadian legislative and policy approaches is situated within a broader discussion of arguments about the “punitive turn” in youth justice, responsibilisation, and cross-jurisdictional criminal justice policy transfer and convergence. Our findings suggest that there are significant differences in the manner and extent to which Australia and Canada have invoked parental responsibility laws and policies as part of the solution to dealing with youth crime. We conclude by speculating on some of the reasons for these differences and establishing an agenda for additional needed cross-jurisdictional research. In particular, we argue that it would be fruitful to undertake a cross-jurisdictional study that examines the development and effects of parental responsibility laws across a larger number of different Western countries as well as across individual states and provinces within these national jurisdictions.