Advertisement

Human Rights for ‘Hard Cases’: Alternatives to Imprisonment for Serious Offending by Children and Youth

  • Nessa Lynch
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology book series (PSIPP)

Abstract

It is almost ubiquitous to have separate and specialized systems for children and youth in conflict with the law, but in even the most progressive of jurisdictions, children and youth convicted of serious violent offences such as homicide may be imprisoned. This chapter analyses the use of imprisonment in adult facilities against young offenders, particularly the imposition of the sentence of life imprisonment, through the lens of international standards for youth justice. This issue has received little attention in the literature, posing as it does conceptual challenges to norms of youth justice, such as best interests, and involving the balancing with interests such as public safety. There is a particular focus on New Zealand, but the analysis will have wider application.

Keywords

Youth justice Children’s rights Imprisonment International standards 

References

  1. Allen, F. A. (1981). The Decline of the Rehabilitative Ideal: Penal Policy and Social Purpose. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alston, P. (1994). The best interests principle: Towards a reconciliation of culture and human rights. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 8(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Applegate, B. K., & Davis, R. K. (2006). Public views on sentencing juvenile murderers: The impact of offender, offense, and perceived maturity? Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 4(1), 55–74.Google Scholar
  4. Ashkar, P. J., & Kenny, D. T. (2008). Views from the inside: Young offenders’ subjective experiences of incarceration. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52(5), 584–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baird, M. I., & Samuels, M. B. (1996). Youth, family and the law: Defining rights and establishing recognition. Journal of Law & Policy, 5, 177–189.Google Scholar
  6. Barretto, C., Miers, S., & Lambie, I. (2016). The views of the public on youth offenders and the New Zealand criminal justice system. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. [Online].  https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X16644500. Accessed February 9, 2018.
  7. Bell, S. A., & Brookbanks, W. J. (2005). Mental Health Law in New Zealand. Wellington: Brookers.Google Scholar
  8. Cavadino, P. (Ed.). (1996). Children Who Kill: An Examination of the Treatment of Juveniles Who Kill in Different European Countries. Winchester: Waterside Press.Google Scholar
  9. Child Rights International Network [CRIN]. (2015). Inhuman Sentencing: Life Imprisonment of Children Around the World—Research Report. [Online]. Available https://www.crin.org/sites/default/files/life_imprisonment_children_global_0.pdf. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  10. Council of Europe. (2010). Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on Child Friendly Justice: Adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on 17 November 2010. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Cuncannan, J. (1997). Only when they’re bad: The rights and responsibilities of our children. Washington University Journal of Urban & Contemporary Law, 51, 273–301.Google Scholar
  12. Defence for Children International. (2003). Kids Behind Bars: A Study on Children in Conflict with the Law: Towards Investing in Prevention, Stopping Incarceration and Meeting International Standards. [Online]. Available http://www.kidsbehindbars.org/english/docs/RapportKBBtotaal.pdf. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  13. Department of Corrections. (2007). About Time: Turning People Away from a Life of Crime and Reducing Re-offending. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Corrections.Google Scholar
  14. Department of Corrections. (2017a). Official information request.Google Scholar
  15. Department of Corrections. (2017b). Prison Facts and Statistics—September 2017. [Online]. Available http://www.corrections.govt.nz/resources/research_and_statistics/quarterly_prison_statistics/prison_stats_september_2017.html. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  16. Department of Corrections. (2017c). Prison Operations Manual. [Online]. Available http://www.corrections.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/627065/Prisoner-Guide-to-POM-050717.pdf. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  17. Feld, B. C. (2012). Adolescent criminal responsibility, proportionality, and sentencing policy: Roper, Graham, Miller/Jackson, and the youth discount. Law & Inequality, 31, 263–330.Google Scholar
  18. Fionda, J. (Ed.). (2001). Legal Concepts of Childhood. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Fitz-Gibbon, K. (2016). Minimum sentencing for murder in England and Wales: A critical examination 10 years after the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Punishment & Society, 18(1), 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goldingay, S. (2012). “Without fists”: Age mixing and its influence on safety and criminal contamination in women’s prisons. Youth Studies Australia, 31, 17–25.Google Scholar
  21. Goldson, B. (2002). New punitiveness: The politics of child incarceration. In J. Muncie, G. Hughes, & E. McLaughlin (Eds.), Youth Justice: Critical Readings (pp. 386–400). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Goldson, B., & Kilkelly, U. (2013). International human rights standards and child imprisonment: Potentialities and limitations. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 21(2), 345–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goldson, B., & Muncie, J. (2012). Towards a global ‘child friendly’ juvenile justice? International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 40(1), 47–64.Google Scholar
  24. Graham, P. (2011). So Brilliantly Clever: Parker, Hulme & the Murder that Shocked the World. Wellington: Awa Press.Google Scholar
  25. Green, D. A. (2012). When Children Kill Children: Penal Populism and Political Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Guggenheim, M. (2005). How children’s lawyers serve state interests. Nevada Law Journal, 6(3), 805–835.Google Scholar
  27. Halsey, M. (2017). Child victims as adult offenders: Foregrounding the criminogenic effects of (unresolved) trauma and loss. British Journal of Criminology, 58(1), 17–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haydon, D., & Scraton, P. (2000). “Condemn a little more, understand a little less”: The political context and rights’ implications of the domestic and European rulings in the Venables-Thompson case. Journal of Law and Society, 27(3), 416–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hollingsworth, K. (2007). Responsibility and rights: Children and their parents in the youth justice system. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 21(2), 190–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jackson, M. (1988). The Māori and the Criminal Justice System: He Whaipaanga Hou—A New Perspective. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Justice Policy and Research Division.Google Scholar
  31. James, A., & Jenks, C. (1996). Public perceptions of childhood criminality. British Journal of Sociology, 47(2), 315–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kilkelly, U. (2008). Youth justice and children’s rights: Measuring compliance with international standards. Youth Justice, 8(3), 187–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kilkelly, U., Moore, L., & Convery, U. (2002). In Our Care: Promoting the Rights of Children in Custody. Belfast: Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.Google Scholar
  34. Levick, M. L., & Schwartz, R. G. (2012). Practical implications of Miller v. Jackson: Obtaining relief in court and before the parole board. Law & Inequality, 31(2), 369–409.Google Scholar
  35. Lynch, N. (2010). Changes to youth justice. New Zealand Law Journal, 129–130.Google Scholar
  36. Lynch, N. (2013). “Contrasts in tolerance” in a single jurisdiction: The case of New Zealand. International Criminal Justice Review, 23(3), 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lynch, N. (2016a). Youth Justice in New Zealand (2nd ed.). Wellington: Thomson Reuters.Google Scholar
  38. Lynch, N. (2016b). Case note: The sentencing of the vulnerable: P v R. Te Wharenga. The New Zealand Criminal Law Review, 61, 103–109.Google Scholar
  39. Lynch, N. (2016c). Permanent name suppression for a child convicted of homicide. New Zealand Law Journal, 13.Google Scholar
  40. Lynch, N. (2018). ‘Manifest injustice?’ The judiciary as moderator of penal excess in the sentencing of youth for murder. Howard Journal of Crime and Justice, 57(1), 57–76.Google Scholar
  41. McDonald, L. (2006). Investigation of the Circumstances Surrounding the Death at Auckland Public Hospital of Prisoner Liam John Ashley of Auckland Central Remand Prison on 25 August 2006, Report to: Chief Executive Department of Corrections. Wellington: New Zealand Department of Corrections.Google Scholar
  42. Ministry of Justice. (2009). Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill—Initial briefing (SP/ADV/1). Law and Order Select Committee. Tabled April 29, 2009.Google Scholar
  43. Muncie, J. (2005). The globalization of crime control—The case of youth and juvenile justice: Neo-liberalism, policy convergence and international conventions. Theoretical Criminology, 9(1), 35–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Muncie, J., & Goldson, B. (Eds.). (2006). Comparative Youth Justice. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  45. Nagin, D. S., Piquero, A. R., Scott, E. S., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey. Criminology & Public Policy, 5(4), 627–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. O’Brien, W., & Fitz-Gibbon, K. (2016). “Cemented in their cells”: A human rights analysis of Blessington, Elliott and the life imprisonment of children in New South Wales. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 22(1), 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Piquero, A. R., & Steinberg, L. (2010). Public preferences for rehabilitation versus incarceration of juvenile offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pratt, J., & Clark, M. (2005). Penal populism in New Zealand. Punishment & Society, 7(3), 303–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Roberts, J. V. (2004). Public opinion and youth justice. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 31, 495–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Roberts, J., & Hough, M. (2005). Sentencing young offenders: Public opinion in England and Wales. Criminal Justice, 5(3), 211–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Royal College of Psychiatrists. (2006). Child Defendants (Occasional Paper 56). [Online]. Available http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/usefulresources/publications/collegereports//op/op56.aspx. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  52. Stanley, E. (2017). From care to custody: Trajectories of children in post-war New Zealand. Youth Justice, 17(1), 57–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Steinberg, L., & Scott, E. S. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. American Psychologist, 58(12), 1009–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tomasevski, K. (Ed.). (1986). Children in Adult Prisons: An International Perspective. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  55. Tonry, M. (2009). The mostly unintended effects of mandatory penalties: Two centuries of consistent findings. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 38(1), 65–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. UN Committee on the Rights of the Child [UNCRC]. (2007). General Comment No. 10 (2007): Children’s Rights in Juvenile Justice (CRC/C/GC/10). [Online]. Available http://undocs.org/CRC/C/GC/10. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  57. UN General Assembly. (1985). United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice [Beijing Rules] (A/RES/40/33). Adopted November 29, 1985.Google Scholar
  58. UN General Assembly. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child (A/RES/44/25). Adopted November 20, 1989.Google Scholar
  59. UN General Assembly. (1990). United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty [Havana Rules] (A/RES/45/113). Adopted December 14, 1990.Google Scholar
  60. UNICEF. (2003). Juvenile Justice Systems: Good Practices in Latin America. Panama: UNICEF Regional Office for the Americas and the Caribbean.Google Scholar
  61. UNICEF. (2006). Juvenile Justice in South Asia: Improving Protection for Children in Conflict with the Law. Kathmandu: UNICEF Regional Office for South Asia.Google Scholar
  62. UNICEF. (2010). Good Practices and Promising Initiatives in Juvenile Justice in the CEE/CIS Region. Geneva: UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS.Google Scholar
  63. Waitangi Tribunal. (2017). Tū Mai te Rangi! Report on the Crown and Disproportionate Reoffending Rates (WAI 2540). [Online]. Available http://maorilawreview.co.nz/2017/04/tu-mai-te-rangi-the-crown-and-disproportionate-maori-reoffending-rates/. Accessed February 7, 2018.
  64. Wright Monod, S. (2017). Portraying those we condemn with care: Extending the ethics of representation. Critical Criminology, 25(3), 343–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Table of Cases

  1. R v Nelson [2012] NZHC 3570.Google Scholar
  2. DP v R [2015] NZCA 476.Google Scholar
  3. P v R [2016] NZCA 128.Google Scholar
  4. R v DP & RP [2015] NZHC 1765.Google Scholar
  5. Te Wini v R [2013] NZCA 201.Google Scholar
  6. Churchward v R [2011] NZCA 531.Google Scholar
  7. R v O’Brien [2003] HC New Plymouth T6/02.Google Scholar
  8. R v Slade and Hamilton [2005] NZCA 19.Google Scholar
  9. R v Bennett [2010] HC AK CRI-2009-292-002198.Google Scholar
  10. R v Te Wini [2012] HC ROT CRI-2008-270-000361.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Victoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations