Juvenile Correctional Policy Enforcement: Taiwan Case

Abstract

In November, 1996 Hsin-chu Juvenile Prison happened a riot, which drew the public attention on juvenile correctional policy. Then, the Taiwan Legislature revise Juvenile Criminal Dispose Law with educational mechanism instead of punishment in 1997. Therefore, the revised Law impacts the position of correctional organization. For example, a juvenile criminal sent to junior high school to take correctional education instead of sending to juvenile prison or juvenile reformatory school. The study was designed to evaluate whether correctional performance of ”education instead of punishment” is better than that of ”balance between education and punishment” and the achievability of correctional policy goal by ”education instead of punishment” alternative. The paper contained 3 parts, including: ◎ Overview of the juvenile Law's principles, purposes and theory basis of German, USA, Japan and Taiwan. ◎ Using repeat rate, cost and benefit analysis and behavior change, etc. To evaluate the execution and result performance. ◎ Compare with that before the Law revised. Data were collected: ◎ Using records research, questionnaire, interview. ◎ Using sampling; juvenile sample 249, correctional organization staff 77. ◎ Using ”juvenile in prison capability and behavior change self evaluation table (or questionnaire)” and ”correctional organization staff work satisfaction investigation table (or questionnaire)” designed by the author. The data provided some support for the contention that 1.Only Taiwan use ”education replace punishment”, other countries use ”education and punishment balance”, serious crime heavy punishment. 2.Juvenile criminal after new correctional organization's correction activities re-commit rate is 1-4% less than the old correction organization. But the cost is doubled. 3.As for behavior change, Taiwan Tao-Yuan juvenile reformatory school is better than that junior high school. 4.Manpower, equipment and financial: new correctional organization is better. But their organization structure is not good enough. 5.”Education replace punishment” and serious crime light punishment do not meet the proportion principle or justice.