Effective Alternatives to Address Crimes Committed by Children
By Olga Isaza, Representative, UNICEF Jamaica
UNICEF is deeply concerned about the proposed amendments to the Child Care and Protection Act (CCPA), which will be presented for debate in the Houses of Parliament early this year. The amendments allow for a child who is 14, and is convicted of capital murder, to be sentenced to imprisonment for life or for such other term not less than 50 years and serve for a period not less than 20 years before becoming eligible for parole. UNICEF’s position is that these amendments are contrary to obligations Jamaica has assumed under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) ratified by the country on 14 May 1991. The amendments will not contribute to public safety and are counter to the well-established global evidence base on how to effectively address serious offending by children.
Jamaica has assumed the commitment, under the CRC, that any sentence imposed on a child must be proportionate not only to the circumstances and gravity of the offense but also to the individual background and circumstances of the child (CRC, Article 40). In addition, the country has agreed that imprisonment of children must “be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time” (CRC, Article 37); and that, “in particular, every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults”. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has said that mandatory minimum sentences are incompatible with these core CRC principles. With the proposed amendment, Jamaica is going against its own commitments.
UNICEF maintains that when sentencing children, judges must have the discretion to consider the unique circumstances of the child offender and the offense. Rather than being bound by inflexible, mandatory minimums, judges should make an individualized determination, taking into account the child’s age, background, cognitive development, and rehabilitative potential, balancing the best interest of the child with the need to ensure public safety.
"Judges must have the discretion to consider the unique circumstances of the child offender and the offense."
While the bill seeks to respond to the country's homicide rate by imposing a mandatory minimum sentence for children who have been accused of murder, the Joint Select Committee itself recognizes that of the people accused of murder between 2016 and 2022 only 3 per cent was under 18 years old. There is no evidence that harsh sentences reduce youth crime. Deterrence is based on the assumption that a would-be criminal weighs the potential consequences of his/her actions and is deterred from crime by fear of the criminal punishment. However, medical evidence clearly demonstrates that children lack the emotional, mental and intellectual maturity necessary to reflect before acting and to be deterred by the threat of criminal consequences.
"...of the people accused of murder between 2016 and 2022 only 3 per cent was under 18 years old. There is no evidence that harsh sentences reduce youth crime."
Nowadays, it is well known that the brain is not fully developed until a person is in their early- to mid-20s. In particular, the prefrontal cortex – responsible for cognitive processing, weighing consequences, long-term planning, problem-solving, risk assessment, and impulse control – is the last part of the brain to develop. Thus, children are not deterred by harsh penalties because they do not have the same ability as adults to think rationally, control impulses, and weigh the risks and consequences of their actions. As their brains develop, the vast majority of youth “age out” of offending behavior by their mid-20s. However, exposure to multiple types of trauma, including imprisonment, can impede children’s healthy brain development, harm their ability to self-regulate and heighten the risks of offending.
The most effective way to ensure public safety is through rehabilitation, not punishment
Children engaged in persistent or violent crime are generally influenced by a range of social and environmental risk factors outside their control – family violence, abuse and neglect, trauma, educational exclusion, socio-economic disadvantage, drug and alcohol addiction, and mental health issues. Many of these problems are compounded by children’s psycho-social immaturity and their susceptibility to peer pressure and exploitation by adults.
International studies show that the most effective way to respond to youth crime is to identify and target the child’s risk factors through a rehabilitative and therapeutic approach. Programs such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and functional family therapy have been proven to be the most effective interventions, with the potential to reduce recidivism rates by up to 40 per cent and improve long-term positive outcomes for children and communities.
"The most effective way to ensure public safety is through rehabilitation, not punishment."
Imprisonment increases the likelihood of re-offending and puts the public at greater risk. There is a large body of international evidence showing that imprisonment of children is counterproductive. Studies tracking children in conflict with the law into adulthood have found that an alarming percentage of children who spend time in correctional centres go on to re-offend into adulthood. Longer periods of imprisonment tend to lead to higher rates of recidivism.
The evidence shows that the detrimental impacts on both the child and public safety far outweigh any perceived punishment or deterrent value of mandatory imprisonment terms.
A better solution to societal concerns is to invest in turning around the root causes of violent offending. Youth crime in Jamaica is being driven by a range of social and economic factors which current social services are not sufficiently resourced to address. Tackling these root causes of crime is a far more effective way to address societal and reputational concerns about violence in Jamaica.
UNICEF calls on the Parliament to reconsider the proposed mandatory minimum sentences for children convicted of murder. Every child must be judged on their own set of circumstances and judges must have the discretion to make the best decisions based on each case. UNICEF urges all stakeholders to invest in a strong, differentiated child justice system in line with international standards, with a focus on evidence-based violence prevention, restorative justice, and rehabilitative programs. More holistic interventions that address the root causes of youth violence are what the country needs.
