Abstract
In 1967 the US President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice in its final report stated: ‘ The formal sanctioning system and pronouncement of delinquency should be used only as a last resort. In place of the formal system, dispositional alternatives to adjudication must be developed for dealing with juveniles, including agencies to provide and coordinate services and procedures to achieve necessary control without unnecessary stigma. Alternatives already available, such as those related to court intake, should be more fully exploited. The range of conduct for which court intervention is authorized should be narrowed, with greater emphasis upon consensual and informal means of meeting the problems of difficult children’, see President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice 1967, p. 2; see also Heinz 2005, p. 168.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In 1967 the US President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice in its final report stated: ‘The formal sanctioning system and pronouncement of delinquency should be used only as a last resort. In place of the formal system, dispositional alternatives to adjudication must be developed for dealing with juveniles, including agencies to provide and coordinate services and procedures to achieve necessary control without unnecessary stigma. Alternatives already available, such as those related to court intake, should be more fully exploited. The range of conduct for which court intervention is authorized should be narrowed, with greater emphasis upon consensual and informal means of meeting the problems of difficult children’, see President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice 1967, p. 2; see also Heinz 2005, p. 168.
- 2.
The second report of the US Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals in 1973 had defined the term ‘diversion’ as follows: ‘… the term “diversion” refers to formally acknowledged and organized efforts to utilize alternatives to initial or continued processing into the justice system. To qualify as diversion, such efforts must be undertaken prior to adjudication and after a legally prescribed action has occurred. In terms of process, diversion implies halting or suspending formal criminal or juvenile justice proceedings against a person who has violated a statute, in favour of processing through noncriminal disposition or means’ (Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals 1973, p. 73).
- 3.
The application of the JJA is restricted to crimes defined by the general penal law (StGB). The Juvenile Welfare Act (JWA) is applied when a child or juvenile in his personal development seems to be ‘in danger’ and needs help or measures provided by the JWA. The measures are chosen according to the estimated educational needs. They are not imposed in an ‘interventionist’ style, but offered and taken according to a request of the parents. In part, the measures are the same as the ones provided by the JJA (e.g. social training courses and special care). The residential care order exists in both laws, too. If the authorities of the youth welfare department want to bring a child or juvenile to a home (against the parents’ will), they must ask the family court judge for a specific order (according to § 1631b Civil Code, Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch). Such homes are usually open facilities.
- 4.
The situation is different in the general penal law for adults (>18- or 21-years old) where diversion according to §§ 153 ff. of the Criminal Procedure Act is restricted to misdemeanours. Felony offences (i.e. crimes with a minimum prison sentence provided by law of 1 year) are excluded.
- 5.
In Germany, this general principle is enshrined into the Constitution (see Art. 20 Basic Law, Grundgesetz), which guarantees this principle with regards to all state interventions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dünkel, F. (2009). Diversion: A Meaningful and Successful Alternative to Punishment in European Juvenile Justice Systems. In: Junger-Tas, J., Dünkel, F. (eds) Reforming Juvenile Justice. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-89295-5_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-89295-5_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-89294-8
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-89295-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)