The demand to reduce the juvenile age from 18 to 16 has gained momentum after the recent gangrape and murder of the Delhi braveheart. Should it be done? Save the Children's director of advocacy and policy Shireen Vakil Miller's shared her perspective on the issue.
Q. What is the position globally, more so in developed countries on the age position for being bracketed as Juvenile? Asked by: sundar1950in
A. The UN defines a child as a person upto the age of 18.
Q. Is it not that just one incident of Delhi where a teenage boy is involved is creating a flutter on this age of 16.Is there any much study done to show that 16 to 18 years persons are many and have gone with lighter punishment in criminal cases? Asked by: sundar1950in
A. In fact proportionately children or juveniles commit much fewer crimes in India only about 1 per cent. The total number is not more than 32 000 in any year in country with a population of over a billion.
Q. Juvenile is defined in law - with relation to mental maturity and not to physical maturity. Is the society wanting a harsher punishment to children? Asked by: sundar1950in
A. Subjecting children to severe and harsh punishments or prolonged incarceration is not the way to deal with juvenile crime- evidence shows that young offenders, particularly only turn out to be hardened criminals in jails especially adult jails.
Q. If this case is treated as " rarest of rare cases" why then this issue of age is also not treated in the same way? Asked by: Dev
A. A uniform age for childhood has been set as below 18 years old in our juvenile justice act in keeping with international legislations. This particular incident, however heinous, should not become an excuse for changing laws and for deviating from unanimously agreed laws on this point. Children and Juveniles need to be treated differently from adults.
Q. Rather than reducing juvenile age family morals and values, pros & cons of sex education to be thought for the age group of 12 to 16. Asked by: sudheendra_sr
A. Yes, this is very important, discriminatory attitudes towards girls and women need to be examined within famaily and schools and positive and equal treatment of girls must be encouraged from birth.
Q. In question two you have answered that only 1 percent of juvenile are involved in the crimes in India then how can reducing the Juvenile age is going to create problem for those 99 percent who are even not involved in any crime. Even it will help us to create a fear in the minds of 1 percent who are involved in crimes. Asked by: Vineet Mishra
A. The answer to solving juvenile crime is not to lower the age, but to ensure enforcement of the juvenile justice act to deal both with juveniles in conflict with the law, as well as children in need of care and protection- for instance those out on the street who face brutality every day.
Q. a crime is a crime irrespective of age. also, these juveniles are working and exposed to the world, not the same thing as a child at home. Asked by: nb
A. They may not be a child at home ,but they are still not mature. In fact, the fact that they are not at home and out on the streets or living a life that children should not be leaves them much more exposed and vulnerable. This does, not however, mean that they should not be punished , but the treatmemnt and trial needs to be as according to juvenile law.
Q. There is no need for a rapist to be treated as Juvenile. when he can think wht is good and bad. He should be treated the same. He is no child he is a monster....your views? Asked by: Samuel
A. This age of adolescence is a very vulnerable one- please remember that no child is born a monster or evil, but are products of the society around them> While what this juvenile allegedly did is horrific, it appears he had to leave home at the age of 13 and was out on the streets homeless and living and having to work under extremely expolitative conditions- who knows what manner of violence and brutality he himself suffered . While he needs to be punished, throwinig him into jail for a long period of time with adults will only turn him into a more hardened criminial, or monster to use your words.
Q. In view of the fact that voting age was reduced to 18 from 21 taking in view of the advancement int eh maturity level of today's generation it is not logical to revise the age of children to a figure much lower, may be to age where they are incapable both mentally and physically to commit 'adult' crimes? Asked by: dev 78629
A. A well thought out law cannot be changed due to one case. There are clear reasons why childhood has been defined upto the age of 18> It used to be 16, but after much thought, the JJ Act was changed 13 years ago to make it 18> It would be a regressive step to change it now.
Q. "You are sixteen going on seventeen, You need someone older and wiser telling you what to do"- Lyrics from movie Sound of Music. So, 16 was thought of as age to be guided parental or otherwise. Change in the Criminal law will make all of them a more knowledgeable ones? Asked by: sundar1950in
A. India has one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, and much thought and care went into the framing of the Juvenile Justice Act 2000, to bring it to the age of 18, in keeping with other rights such as the right to vote, property, driving etc. To change it now would be a regressive step and would do nothing to reduce either rape or juvenile crime.
Q. This is an open and shut case...this doesn't require technically. He is equally involve...India need to be an example after entire world talked about the story. Asked by: Samuel
A. India has one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, and much thought and care went into the framing of the Juvenile Justice Act 2000, to bring it to the age of 18, in keeping with other rights such as the right to vote, property, driving etc. To change it now would be a regressive step and would do nothing to reduce either rape or juvenile crime.
Comments
0 comment