Oped»
Juvenile justice
MAY 04 - There isn’t any unanimously agreed upon age as to when a person stops being a juvenile and becomes an adult capable of making adult decisions. Every state has defined a juvenile from its own perspective. As far as the law is concerned, the only difference between a juvenile and an adult is age. Therefore, if an individual is within a certain age range, he or she is classified as a juvenile.
The principle of juvenile justice is that a child should not be considered a criminal but someone who needs special love, care and treatment for resolution of his or her problem. The Children’s Act 1992 prohibits illegal detention, torture and any form of inhumane treatment which degrades a child’s development.
In the history of Nepal, the legal system was mainly based on religion. The moral and ethical rules founded on the “precepts of the Hindu religion” thus played the role of guiding principles of justice. The Muluki Ain was immensely influenced by the “Hindu value system” of strict child discipline where a child was rendered to face liability for his immediate correction, irrespective of age. The Muluki Ain was immensely influenced by this value system, and consequently the “criminal responsibility at lower age” was adopted as an outcome of the same.
The issue of juvenile justice was not perceived to be an important issue until the ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and enforcement of the Children’s Act. Realising the need for separate procedures and treatment for children who come in conflict with the law, the CRC has established core principles for the treatment of children in conflict with the law that clearly states, “State Parties recognise the right of every child alleged as, accused of, or recognised as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child’s sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child’s respect for human rights and which takes into account the child’s age and the desirability of promoting the child’s reintegration and the child’s assuming a constructive role in society.”
After the ratification of the CRC, various non-governmental organisations including legal institutions advocated adopting a juvenile justice system in Nepal, and many organisations including UNICEF implemented programmes with various governmental organisations particularly the judiciary in developing consensus for the need of a juvenile justice system.
The rights mentioned in the Children’s Act feelingly refer to provisions for just and humane conditions for minorities; but a killjoy is thrown on all these desirable things by not implementing them. In urban areas like Kathmandu, involvement of children in serious types of crime has been increasing rapidly.
An article published in Kantipur dated May 4, 2008 stated that a child named Suresh Gurung aged 14 had been put behind bars for more than a year under the court’s order. This shows negligence of the legal gatekeepers. Children who are kept under judicial custody must be placed in a juvenile rehabilitation home. Unfortunately, there are a number of cases where children have been kept behind bars for months with adult prisoners.
Children have been neglected and their issues undermined even in today’s society. Education, rehabilitation and social integration are thus the desired and zealously protected goals of the juvenile justice system. Application of such negligence when dealing with children in conflict with the law is not only disastrous to the child but also equally disastrous to society as wrong treatment of juveniles will produce hardened criminals in the days to come.
A juvenile justice system in Nepal is in the making. Overnight change cannot be expected, however, the necessity for implementation of the existing legal framework is to be felt. A universal fact that we tend to overlook is that children are most defenceless to prejudice, for reasons of age, unawareness of laws and rights, powerlessness to fight back in case of injustice and innocence in the ways of the world. A child is susceptible to all kinds of abuse and the psychological impact resulting from the humiliation and trauma of legal proceedings.
By virtue of their delicate sensitivities, it is easy for children to develop a thoroughly negative attitude towards the state and society. It must be understood that a corrective approach must be applied to juveniles in conflict with the law and they mustn’t be treated in a harsh manner. As discussed above, children have been put behind bars and have been treated unlawfully. When juvenile offenders are kept in prison, not only a single right but other fundamental rights like the right to freedom (Article 12), right to security (Article 18), right to justice (Article 24), right against torture (Article 26) and right against exploitation (Article 29) will also be violated which are guaranteed by the Interim Constitution of Nepal 2007.
Juvenile laws were framed in Nepal more than a decade ago, but there is a big gap between rhetoric and practice. Merely framing laws is not going to help juvenile delinquents. So far as the implementation of juvenile justice is concerned, I think we are lost somewhere. On the one hand, we are not able to give up old traditions, and on the other hand, we are also not able to translate the modern judicial system for children. In fact, we are getting nowhere. Nepal is advocating children’s rights but violation of their rights is increasing day
by day.
So many provisions regarding the administration of juvenile justice are still locked up in the law books. No one knows when they will come out and be translated into action. As discussed above, putting a child in jail for more than six months and handcuffing a child is strictly prohibited. But these laws remain locked up in the dark, and as a result, children in conflict with the law are facing hard times.
Posted on: 2010-05-05 09:12
Headlines
Advertisements
