Consequences of Raising Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility on Thai Young Offenders

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kattiya Ratanadilok
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Young Offenders ◽  
Minimum Age

scholarly journals Gendered Justice: Inequalities in the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility in Iran

Youth Justice ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 147322542110228
Author(s):  
Jo Staines ◽  
Nadia Aghtaie ◽  
Jessica Roy
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Islamic Countries ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
The United Nations

Using the minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) in Iran as an illustration, this article explores the continued resistance against girls’ rights in some Islamic countries. The gendered construction of childhood in Iran has resulted in a differential MACR, which for boys is notably higher than that recommended by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, yet for girls is unacceptably low. While breaches of girls’ rights in other areas are defended on the grounds of paternalistic concerns, it is argued that the MACR is a religious-politico decision that, in Iran, upholds the rights of boys but denies the rights of girls, propagating their wider subjugation.

‘Unsafe, Unjust and Harmful to Wider Society’: Grounds for Raising the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility in England and Wales

Youth Justice ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barry Goldson
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Community Safety ◽  
Social Harm ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Progressive Reform ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
Outcomes For Children ◽  
Human Rights Standards

This article assesses critically the means by which social (symbolic) and statutory (institutionalized) constructions of child ‘offenders’ in England and Wales intersect and underpin processes of responsibilization and adultification. It is argued that securing immunity from prosecution should be the principal driver for raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility. In this sense the analysis is less concerned with questions of capacity and mens rea and more interested in: compliance with international human rights standards; modelling a system of justice that is broadly compatible with law, policy and practice in Europe (and elsewhere); ensuring that criminal law coheres with civil law; minimizing social harm and obtaining the best outcomes for children in conflict with the law, the wider community and the general public in respect of crime prevention and community safety. Finally, the prospects for such progressive reform within a context of heightened politicization are considered.

scholarly journals Psychometric Challenges in the Measurement of Constructs Underlying Criminal Responsibility in Children and Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuxi Shang ◽  
Yumiao Fu ◽  
Beibei Ma ◽  
Li Wang ◽  
Dexin Wang
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Age Differences ◽  
Junior High School ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Early Puberty ◽  
Dialectical Thinking ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
Post Hoc

At present, many countries have lowered the minimum age of criminal responsibility to deal with the trend of juvenile crime. In practical terms, whether countries advocate for lowering the age of criminal responsibility along with early puberty, or regulating the minimum age of juvenile criminal responsibility through their policies, their deep-rooted hypothesis is that age is tied to adolescents’ psychological growth, and, with the rise in age, the capacity for dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy gradually improves. With this study, we aimed to test whether this hypothesis is valid. The participants were 3,208 students from junior high school, senior high school, and freshman in the S province of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). We subjected the gathered materials to independent-samples t-tests, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), linear regression analysis, and Bonferroni post hoc test. The influence of the age variable upon dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy was significant (p = 0.002, p = 0.000, p = 0.072), but only empathy was positively correlated with age variable (B = 0.032); dialectical thinking ability (B = −0.057), and self-control ability (B = −0.212) were negatively correlated with the age variable. Bonferroni post hoc test confirmed these findings. Therefore, we concluded the following: (1) Juvenile criminal responsibility, based on the capacity for dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy, is not positively correlated with age. (2) Age is not the only basis on which to judge a juvenile’s criminal responsibility. (3) More research that directly links age differences in brain structure and function to age differences in legally relevant capacities and capabilities(e.g., dialectical thinking, self-control, and empathy) is needed. (4) Political countries should appropriately raise the minimum age of criminal responsibility and adopt the doli incapax principle in the judicial process.

scholarly journals Starosne granice krivično-pravnog maloljetstva u uporednom pravu

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 781-802
Author(s):  
Vedad Gurda
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Standards ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
Age Limit ◽  
Criminal Legislation

This paper presents a comparative legal overview of the juvenile age of criminal responsibility as an age framework in which young people enjoy a special (privileged) criminal status due to their immaturity. When it comes to the lower limit as minimum age of criminal responsibility, comparative legal solutions are different and they range from six or seven years in some countries, up to eighteen years in other. In most European countries, the age limit is set at the age of 14, which is the minimum age of criminal capacity proposed by UN Committee on the Rights of the Child. In comparative law the significance of the age limit is relativized by prescribing two or more such age limits (depending on the gravity of the crime or due to the application of the doli capax doctrine), as well as other legal solutions. On the other hand, in most countries, juvenile criminal responsibility lasts until the age of eighteen, although in some states in the United States and some other non-European countries it ends earlier. The importance of the age limit in some legislations is relativized by the possibilities of applying juvenile criminal law to young adults, but also through the possibility of referring minors to the criminal courts of general jurisdiction (“adult courts”) even before the age of criminal majority. In the paper was analyzed international legal standards related to these issues, as well as legislative solutions in the countries of the region. In conclusion it was stated that the legal solutions contained in juvenile criminal legislation of the countries of the former SFR Yugoslavia are harmonized with international standards in this area.

A cut-off value of third molar maturity index for indicating a minimum age of criminal responsibility: Older or younger than 16 years?

2019 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
pp. 108-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sudheer B. Balla ◽  
Subramanyeswara S. Chinni ◽  
Ivan Galic ◽  
Aditya Mohan Alwala ◽  
Pramod Machani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Maturity Index ◽  
Minimum Age
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document