Minimum Age Of Criminal Responsibility Research Articles

Do we need universal minimum age of criminal responsibility?

Although considerable efforts have been made in international law in order to set the general minimum age of criminal responsibility, no consensus has been reached on this issue. Having in mind the nature of international law it seems that such efforts are futile. Regardless of the (in)ability of international law to provide an answer to the question regarding minimum age of criminal responsibility, and the need to set general minimum age at the international level applicable in different societies, international normative acts bind national jurisdictions on regional and even universal level. With the aim of examining international standards dealing with the minimum age in national criminal legislation, and having in mind the obligation of states to harmonize their laws with international legal instruments, the author made an overview of the most relevant among these international standards in order of their creation. The tendency of harmonizing the minimum age of criminal responsibility, while formally hidden behind the rule of law argument in the states that belong to different cultures, ridicules specific character of particular culture on which every moral and legal order rests. As an illustration of this position, the author researched a number of (very different) comparative-law approaches. The comparative-law analysis clearly reveals colonial and non-colonial approach to this issue. Also, comparison of national legislation indicates wider dependents of child's understanding of criminal law on particular culture. The analysis of international regulatory standards and comparative-law approaches in a number of countries raises the issue of justification of harmonization with predominant standards of the international community in situations when national-law regulation does not correspond to the needs of a particular society.

Children's Rights and the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: A Global Perspective. By Don Cipriani (Farnham: Ashgate, 2009, 232pp. 55.00 hb)

Children's Rights and the Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility: A Global Perspective. By Don Cipriani (Farnham: Ashgate, 2009, 232pp. 55.00 hb)

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Punishment of Children Under English Law – Public and Private Vices?

The punishment of children in the domestic sphere and in the public domain is an issue of concern for those with care of children or whose interests lie in the protection of children’s human rights. How children are treated when they are judged to have broken rules reveals fundamental approaches to the welfare of those who have yet to reach adulthood. The effect of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in respect of how children are punished, whether in the home or as transgressors of criminal law, may be examined through two distinct but linked spheres: the private and home life context of domestic or personal punishment, and the public domain of state punishment of children in terms of criminal responsibility under English Law. Both spheres reveal attitudes towards the rights of children which suggest how human rights are accorded to particular groups in applying international obligations to a state’s domestic provision. This article seeks to explore some issues of compliance with Article 19 (the physical chastisement of children), Article 37 (the imprisonment of children being a ‚last resort’) and Article 40 (the minimum age of criminal responsibility) of the United Nations Convention on the␣Rights of the Child. The application of the rights of children and the operation of the ‚best interests’ of the child in applying Articles 19, 37 and 40 suggests that there are issues in relation to non-compliance which indicate a diminution of the separate rights of children under English Law in particular and in the operation of the best interests of the child.

Entwicklungsaspekte in der Strafrechtsbegutachtung

The history of German legislation resulting in the developmental orientation of juvenile court law (JCL) led to setting the minimum age of criminal responsibility at the age of 14, which places Germany within the average range compared to other EU countries, even though most skills regarding the discernment of right- or wrong-doing are developed in earlier stages of life. The requirement put by section sign 3 JCL that legal discernment be emotionally grounded and the necessity to explore context factors (family or group, specific situation) make psychiatric evaluation of adolescents in court a delicate task. It is indispensable that new findings in neurobiology be considered upon making an assessment of the individual neuro-developmental status. In contrast, an assessment according to section sign 105 JCL considers the overall development irrespective of the crime(s). Developmental issues regarding legal prognosis are discussed for some types of offences (homicide, sexual offences, arson).

Abstract

Providing appropriate legal mechanisms, that evaluate the progression of development from the age of childhood innocence to maturity and full responsibility, considered one of the difficult areas of criminal justice policy. The minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) in children varies among countries and differs widely owing to history and culture. Due to rising and brutality of criminal offenses, particularly by juveniles, few countries have lowered the minimum age of criminal responsibility, and many have considered/considering to do the same. India is one such country in which is under the proposal of lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 16 years. As there is lack of useful age assessment methods, that can indicate whether if the individual in question is younger (<16 years) or older than MACR (≥16 years), the present study was undertaken to derive a specific cut-off value of the third molar maturity index (I3M) for this purpose. The sample consisted of 1078 orthopantomograms (OPTs) from Andhra Pradesh, India, aged between 11 and 20 years (45.4% males and 54.6% females). The reproducibility of I3M was calculated by intra-class correlation coefficients, which showed an intra-rater and inter-rater agreement of 0.912 and 0.891, respectively. The sample was divided into training dataset (819 OPTs), to test I3M and gender as independent variables and MACR as a dependent variable by logistic regression analysis, and test dataset (259 OPTs). A receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was performed to evaluate the specific cut-off value of I3M for predicting MACR status. A logistic regression analysis showed that gender was not statistically significant for predicting MACR status while ROC analysis indicated a cut-off value of I3M = 0.293 as best for predicting MACR status. The performance of derived cut-off value was tested in a test data set. The sensitivity of the test was 90.6% and 90%, while specificity was 86% and 87.1% in males and females, respectively. The proportion of correctly classified individuals was 88.0% and 88.7% in males and females, respectively. The estimated Bayes post-test probability in males was 87.2% and while in females it was 88.3%. The results highlight the contribution of the derived cut-off value of I3M for discriminating individuals around MACR and should be evaluated in other populations.

Juvenile delinquency: Historical, cultural, and legal perspectives : by Arnold Binder, Gilbert Geis, and Dickson Bruce MacMillan Publishing Company (866 Third Avenue, New York, New York 10022), 1988, 566 pp., hardcover—$29.95.

Providing appropriate legal mechanisms, that evaluate the progression of development from the age of childhood innocence to maturity and full responsibility, considered one of the difficult areas of criminal justice policy. The minimum age of criminal responsibility (MACR) in children varies among countries and differs widely owing to history and culture. Due to rising and brutality of criminal offenses, particularly by juveniles, few countries have lowered the minimum age of criminal responsibility, and many have considered/considering to do the same. India is one such country in which is under the proposal of lowering the age of criminal responsibility to 16 years. As there is lack of useful age assessment methods, that can indicate whether if the individual in question is younger (<16 years) or older than MACR (≥16 years), the present study was undertaken to derive a specific cut-off value of the third molar maturity index (I3M) for this purpose. The sample consisted of 1078 orthopantomograms (OPTs) from Andhra Pradesh, India, aged between 11 and 20 years (45.4% males and 54.6% females). The reproducibility of I3M was calculated by intra-class correlation coefficients, which showed an intra-rater and inter-rater agreement of 0.912 and 0.891, respectively. The sample was divided into training dataset (819 OPTs), to test I3M and gender as independent variables and MACR as a dependent variable by logistic regression analysis, and test dataset (259 OPTs). A receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was performed to evaluate the specific cut-off value of I3M for predicting MACR status. A logistic regression analysis showed that gender was not statistically significant for predicting MACR status while ROC analysis indicated a cut-off value of I3M = 0.293 as best for predicting MACR status. The performance of derived cut-off value was tested in a test data set. The sensitivity of the test was 90.6% and 90%, while specificity was 86% and 87.1% in males and females, respectively. The proportion of correctly classified individuals was 88.0% and 88.7% in males and females, respectively. The estimated Bayes post-test probability in males was 87.2% and while in females it was 88.3%. The results highlight the contribution of the derived cut-off value of I3M for discriminating individuals around MACR and should be evaluated in other populations.