The Nature of Child Justice Administration

Abdulraheem-Mustapha, Mariam Adepeju

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-19015-6_3

Mariam Adepeju Abdulraheem-Mustapha²

101 Accesses

Abstract

The author examines the historical evolution of child justice administration generally in the pre- and post-colonial periods and the influence on later developments on legislations and policies of Nigeria and South Africa as case studies. This chapter shows that colonialism, economic policies and the effect of the menace of insurgency, cattle rustlers and other fundamentalists in Nigeria with the South African’s experience of incessant attack on foreigners and xenophobic attacks have impacted negatively on the rights of the child. In laying a proper foundation for the objectives of this book, the chapter further examined the theoretical expositions of child justice administration according to the principle underpinning international instruments on the subject by tracing its fundamental objectives from its early development. Navigation of child offenders and the uniqueness of child justice system in contradistinction to criminal justice system form parts of discussion in this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 39.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 54.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 84.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Berlins, M., and Wansell, G., Caught in the Act (London: Macmillan, 1974), 1.
2.
Ibid.
3.
Ibid.
4.
Chris, C., and Robb, W., Juvenile Justice: An Australian Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 9. See also Dambazau, A. B., Criminology & Criminal Justice (Ibadan: Spectrum Books Limited, 2007), 337.
5.
Ibid.
6.
Bradley, Kate, Juvenile Delinquency and the Evolution of the British Juvenile Courts, c. 1900–1950.
7.
Ibid.
8.
Ibid.
9.
Behlmer, G., Friends of the Family: The English Home and Its Guardians (Stanford, 1998), 242–247.
10.
The Child Study Movement was founded in 1893 by James Sully, a British psychologist. The movement attracted other experts—such as the American psychiatrist G. Stanley Hall—and it also provided a forum for amateur readers alike to explore the psychology and psychiatry of the young.
11.
The Charity Organisation Society (COS) was concerned with the rational distribution of charitable alms among the needy, which they hoped to achieve through the careful investigation and consideration of the needs of individual families. See Lewis, J., The Voluntary Sector, the State and Social Work in Britain: The Charity Organisation Society/Family Welfare Association Since 1869 (London, 1995). Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
12.
The Illinois Legislature created this nation’s first juvenile court in Chicago after being lobbied by Timothy D. Hurley, a judge and former probation officer, and Julia Lathrop, of the Illinois Board of Charities with the help of the Catholic Visitation and Aid Society and the Chicago Bar Association who advocated abandonment of the system that placed child offenders and wayward children in adult jails and prisons and removed children who had been arbitrarily declared wayward from the custody of their parents and placed them in prisonlike institutions.
13.
Clapp, E. J., Mothers of All Children: Women Reformers and the Rise of Juvenile Courts in Progressive Era America (University Park, PA, 1998), 89, 45 and 120.
Ibid.
14.
See Logan, A., ‘A Suitable Person for Suitable Cases: The Gendering of Juvenile Courts in England c. 1910–39’ (2005), Twentieth Century British History, 16, 129–145 and Bradley, K. M., ‘Juvenile Delinquency, the Juvenile Courts and the Settlement Movement 1908–50: Basil Henriques and Toynbee Hall’ (2008), Twentieth Century British History, 19, 133–135. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
15.
Ibid.
16.
The Children’s Act 1908 had six parts: infant life protection; the prevention of cruelty; the prohibition of juvenile smoking the refining of the roles of industrial and reformatory schools; the creation of the juvenile courts; and a “miscellaneous” division which included such provision as the banning of under-fourteens from public houses.
17.
Hendrick, H., Child Welfare: England 1872–1989 (London: 1994), 121–125. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
18.
Parry-Jones, W. L., ‘The History of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: Its Present Day Relevance’ (1989) Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30, 3–11 in Bradley, Kate, Juvenile Delinquency and the Evolution of the British Juvenile Courts, c. 1900–1950.
19.
See Whitehead, P., and Statham, R., The History of Probation: Politics, Power and Cultural Change 1876–2005 (Crayford, 2006). Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
20.
Behlmer, G., Friends of the Family. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
21.
Lerman, P., ‘Policing Juveniles in London, Shifts in Guiding Discretion, 1893–1968’ (1984), British Journal of Criminology, 24, 168–184; 175–176.
22.
Ibid.
23.
“The welfare of the child or young person as the primary object of the juvenile court” formed part of the committee’s report in 1927. The report committee also called for magistrates with experience in dealing with young people, and that younger magistrates should be recruited to these posts. The committee’s report further reiterated the importance of issues raised by the 1908 Act, notably that “juvenile courts should be held at different times and in different places to adult sittings of courts”. In addition, the report also demanded that “court proceedings be made as simple as possible in order that children and young people might better understand what was happening around them”. But the report went further, calling for children and young people to remain anonymous and to be in no way identifiable in media reporting of cases. It was felt that public knowledge of a child’s acts could in future unfairly jeopardise their chances of finding employment. It further demanded that courts be furnished with as much information as possible about the lives of the children brought before it, about their school attendance, their health and their home environment. Probation was an important part of the work of the court with young offenders, a method by which the young person could be reclaimed to good citizenship through the firm and wise guidance of an appropriate adult. See the report of the Departmental Committee on the Treatment of Young Offenders (Cmd 2831, London, 1925–1927), 121–123. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
24.
See the report of the Departmental Committee on the Treatment of young Offenders (Cmd 2831, London, 1925–1927), 121–123. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
25.
Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Naomi, E. N., Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria (Lagos: Constitutional Right Project [CRP], 2003), 1–2. See also, Okonkwo, C. O., Nwankwo, C., and Ibhawoh, B., Administration of Juvenile Justice in Nigeria (1st ed.; Lagos: Constitutional Rights Project [CRP], 1997), 1–2.
26.
Ibid.
27.
Oduwole, E. O, ‘Punishment as a Form of Legal Order in an African Society’ (2011) International Research Journals, 2(5), 1124–1129.
28.
Idowu, E. B, Olodumare: God in Yoruba Belief (Ibadan: Longman, 1962) in Oduwole, E. O, ‘Punishment as a Form of Legal Order in an African Society’.
29.
Ibid.
30.
Ibid.
31.
Mbiti, J. S, African Philosophy and Religions (Heinemann, 1982), 206. See also Ajisafe Moore, E. A., The Laws and Customs of the Yoruba People in Abeokuta Nigeria (Fola Bookshops, 2010) in Oduwole E. O., ‘Punishment as a Form of Legal Order in an African Society’.
32.
Ibid.
33.
Ikenga, K. E. O., ‘Crime and Punishment in Igbo Customary Law: The Challenge of Nigerian Criminal Jurisprudence’. Available at www.ajol.info/index.php/og/article/download/57917/46285. Accessed on 18 December 2013. See also, Ikenga, K. E. O., ‘The Principles and Practice of Justice in Traditional Igbo Jurisprudence’. Available at www.ajol.info/index.php/og/article/viewFile/52335/40960. Accessed on 18 December 2013.
34.
Ibid.
35.
Drug abuse, teenage pregnancies, prostitution, alcoholism, robbery and violence have proliferated among young persons.
36.
Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria, 5.
37.
Ibid.
38.
The logic of colonialism is the political subjugation and domination of a people in order to exploit their labour and resources. Colonial rule, therefore, required repressive legal system, especially vicious and oppressive penal institutions with effective capacity to repress, punish and deter individuals and groups that engage in activities that are deemed detrimental to colonial political and economic interests. Thus, colonial legal and penal institutions were not designed to protect the interests of the generality of citizens but rather to defend the political and economic interests of the rulers in Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice, 25.
39.
Three conferences were held in Nigeria on Juvenile Justice Administration alone in 2002. The three conferences were the National Conference on Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria Abuja, 2–3 July 2002, the Northern Zonal Consultative Conference on Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria, Kano, 16–17 September 2002, and the Southern Zonal Consultative Conference on Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria, Ibadan, 16–17 October 2002. These three conferences were a collaborative initiative by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Constitutional Rights Project (CRP), Penal Reform International (PRI) and UNICEF. http://www.Cleen.org/Juvenile%20justice%20Report.pdf. Accessed on 17 February 2011.
40.
Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I., Police-Community Violence in Nigeria in Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice. See also Odekunle, F., ‘The Nigeria Police Force: A Preliminary Assessment of Functional Performance’ (1979), International Journal of Sociology of Law, 6, 73–78; Alemika, E. E. O., ‘The Smoke Screen, Rhetoric and Reality of Penal Incarceration in Nigeria’ (1988), International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 7(1) 138–149; Alemika, E. E. O., ‘Policing and Perception of Police in Nigeria’ (1988), Police Studies: International Review of Police Development, 11(4), 161–176; Alemika, E. E. O., ‘Socio-Economic and Criminology Attributes of Convicts in Two Nigerian Prisons’ (1988), Journal of Criminal Justice, 16(3), 197–207; Alemika, E. E. O., ‘Colonialism, State and Policing Nigeria’ (1993), Crime Law and Social Change, 187–219; Ahire, P. T., Imperial Policing Milton Keynes (Open University Press 1991) in Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice; Adewoye, O., The Judicial System in Southern Nigeria 1854–1954 (London: Longman 1977); and Tamuno, T. N., The Police in Modern Nigeria (Ibadan: University Press 1970), 45; Milner, W. B. ‘Lower Class Culture as Generating Milieu of Gang Delinquency’ (1958), Journal of Social Issues, 14, 5–19.
41.
Ibid.
42.
Ibid.
43.
Ibid.
44.
See Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice.
45.
Juvenile Justice Report: ‘Juvenile Justice in Nigeria’. Available at http://www.britannica.com/EBcheckedtopic/kuvenilejustice/nigeria. Accessed on 2 February 2009.
46.
‘Girls “Aged 7 or 8” Staged Maiduguri Suicide Attack—Witnesses’, Punch, 11 December 2016.
47.
‘Six Killed as Suicide Bombers Attack Maiduguri’, Premium Times, 15 March 2017. Available at https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/226150-six-killed-suicide-bombers-attack-maiduguri.html. Accessed on 10 December 2017.
48.
‘Three Female Suicide Bombers Die in Failed Attacks on Maiduguri—SEMA’, Punch, 18 November 2017.
49.
Robyn Kriel, ‘Boko Haram Favors Women, Children as Suicide Bombers, Study Reveals’, CNN, 11 August 2017. Available at: https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/10/africa/boko-haram-women-children-suicide-bombers/index.html.
50.
Child Right Act Cap C50 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.
51.
Children and Young Persons Act came into being in 1943 to guide the administration of the juvenile justice system which in turn constitutes part of the pillars of the Nigerian criminal justice system.
52.
The Dynamics of Youth Justice and The Convention on the Rights of the Child in Juvenile Justice Report: ‘Juvenile Justice in Nigeria’. Available at http://www.britannica.com/EBcheckedtopic/kuvenilejustice/nigeria. Accessed on 15 July 2011.
53.
See Juvenile Justice. Available at www.ksrmccs.ac.in/wp-content/…/JUVENILE-JUSTICE.docx. Accessed on 20 June 2011.
54.
See generally, Ladan, M. T., Rights of the Child in Nigeria: An Overview in Individual Rights and Communal Responsibility in Nigeria (Abuja, Nigeria: National Human Rights Commission, 1998), 25.
55.
Roberts, Cynthia H., Juvenile Delinquency: Causes and Effect (Yale-Haven Teachers Institute, 1986). Available at http://www.yale.edu/yhnt/curriculum. Accessed on 2 May 2012.
56.
Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice (Lagos: Centre for Law Enforcement Education, 2001), 30.
57.
Maithufi, Ignatius, ‘The Best Interest of the Child and African Customary Law’, in C. J. Davel (ed.), Introduction to Child Law in South Africa (2000), 140.
58.
ibid.
59.
Ibid.
60.
Bekker, J. C., ‘Children and Young Persons in Indigenous Law’, in J. A. Robinson (ed.), The Law of Children and Young Persons in South Africa (1997), 193.
61.
History of Southern Africa South of the Zambezi (1907), 221.
62.
Bekker, J. C., ‘Children and Young Persons in Indigenous Law’, in J. A. Robinson (ed.), The Law of Children and Young Persons in South Africa (1997), 193.
63.
Theal, G. M., History of South Africa Since 1795: The Cape Colony from 1795 to 1828 (Vol. 5, 1964), 286–288.
64.
Midgley, James, Children on Trial: A Study of Juvenile Justice (1975), 53.
65.
Eakelaar, J., ‘Child Endangerment and Child Protection in England and Wales’, in M. Rosenheim, F. Zimring, D. Tanenhaus, and B. Dohm B (eds.), A Century of Juvenile Justice (2002), 384.
66.
Alice Saffy, Jacqueline, ‘A Historical Perspective of the Youthful Offender’, in C. Bezuidenhout and S. Joubert (eds.), Child and Youth Misbehaviour in South Africa (2003), 18.
67.
Ibid.
68.
Ibid.
69.
Ibid.
70.
Geffen, Irene, The Laws of South Africa Affecting Women and Children (1928), 341.
71.
Ibid.
72.
Van der Spuy, E., Scharf, W., and Lever, J., ‘The Politics of Youth Crime and Justice in South Africa’, in C. Sumner (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Criminology (2004), 172.
73.
Ibid.
74.
Bosman-Swanepoel, H. M., and Wessels, P. J., A Practical Approach to the Child Care Act (1995), 5.
75.
Ibid.
76.
Sinclair, June D., and Bedil, Susan, ‘Law of Persons’ (1983), Annual Survey of South Africa Law, 73.
77.
Ibid.
78.
See du Plessis, Lourens, M., and Corder, H., Understanding South Africa’s Transitional Bill of Rights (1994), 38, 46, 185–187 (Bill of Rights); du Plessis, Lourens, M., ‘A Background to Drafting the Chapter on Fundamental Rights’, in B. de Villiers (ed.), Birth of a Constitution (1994), 90–91; du Plessis, Lourens, ‘The Genesis of the Chapter on Fundamental Rights I South Africa’s Transitional Constitution’ (1994), SA Public Law, 9, 10; Sloth-Nielson, Julia, ‘Chicken Soup or Chainsaws: Some Implications of the Constitutionalisation of Children’s Rights in South Africa’, Acta Juridica (1996), 6–12; Skelton Thesis, 392–395; and Dutschke, Mira, Defining Children’s Constitutional Rights to Social Services. A Project 28 Working Paper (2006), 48–52 (Defining).
79.
See Technical Committee on Fundamental Rights, First Progress Report, 14 May 1993, 4. See also, Section 30 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 200 of 1993.
80.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child was ratified by South Africa ratified in June 1995.
81.
South Africa acceded to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction with the promulgation of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Act 72 of 1996 which is repealed by the present Children’s Act 38 of 2005. See Chapter 17 of the Act in particular.
82.
South Africa acceded to the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Co-operation in Respect of Inter-Country Adoption on 1 December 2003. This was also repealed by the Children’s Act. See Chapter 16 of the Act in particular.
83.
Many Constitutional Court judgements referred to the Convention and other international children’s rights instruments. See the cases of Grootboom v Oostenberg Municipality 2000 (3) BCLR 277(C); Du Toit v Minister of Welfare and Population Development (Lesbian and Gay Equality Project as Amicus Curiae) 2003 (2) SA 198 (CC); South African Human Rights Commission v President of the Republic of South Africa 2005 (1) SA 580 (CC); AD v DW (Centre for Child Law as Amicus Curiae) 2008 (3) SA 183 (CC); Director of Public Prosecutions, Transvaal v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and Others 2009 (4) SA 222 (CC); Governing Body of the Juma Musjid Primary School and Others v Essay NO and Others ( Centre for Child Law and Another as Amicus Curiae) 2011 (8) BCLR 761 (CC) (hereafter Juma Musjid); and C and Others v Department of Health and Social Development, Gauteng, and Others 2012 (2) SA 208 (CC).
84.
See generally Section 7 of the South African Children’s Act, No. 38 of 2005 which explicitly laid down the factors to be considered whenever the ‘best interest of the child standard is to be applied’. In the same scenario, Section 63 and ‘table of contents P under the Schedule’ to this Act empowered the court to have two sittings, one for ‘ordinary court’ for the adult offender and the other as ‘a child justice court’ for the trial of the child offender.
85.
For example, Prins, Herschel, Offenders, Deviants or Patients? Explorations in Clinical Criminology (4th ed.; London and New York: Routledge and Taylor & Francis Group, 2010), 68–101 in the course of examining juvenile offenders, deviants or patients in clinical criminology made a passage for concern about the circumstances of children and young persons under sixteen years of age who have committed homicides and other grave crimes and are being held in various criminal justice institutions. He contended that before any examination on how to handle a juvenile is conducted there must be enquiries into the mental state of the juvenile and allied matters, and there must be hospital and penal provisions. Unlike Nigeria child justice system, South African child justice system has provided in its Schedule the ‘categories or classes of persons that are competent to conduct the evaluation of the criminal capacity of a child’ to be ‘a medical practitioner- a psychiatrist; and a psychologist who have registered under the Health Professional Act, 1974’.
86.
Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice (Lagos: Centre for Law Enforcement Education, 2001), 15.
87.
Ibid.
88.
Ordinarily courts are prohibited from trying child offenders in public or open court with the public in attendance irrespective of the crime allegedly committed. But on the contrary, a child offender who committed a crime with an adult is usually tried in the public.
89.
Child Justice Act has empowered the magistrate to separate the trial of a child who has been alleged to have committed an offence with an adult in South Africa.
90.
Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice (Lagos: Centre for Law Enforcement Education, 2001), 15.
91.
See Goldson, B., The New Youth Justice (Lyme Regis, 2000), 309; Goldson, B., and Muncie J., Youth, Crime and Justice: Critical Issues (London, 2006), 202; and Garlard, D., The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society (Oxford and London, 2002) in Bradley, Kate, Juvenile Delinquency and the Evolution of the British Juvenile Courts, c. 1900–1950. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html. Accessed on 30 May 2011.
92.
Freda A., Gerhard, O. W. M., and Williams, S. L., Criminology and the Criminal Justice System (6th ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007), 424.
93.
Ibid.
94.
Beccaria, C., On Crimes and Punishment (reprinted; Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill) in Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Naomi, E. N., Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria (Lagos: Constitutional Right Project [CRP], 2003), 14.
95.
Ibid., 15–16.
96.
Wilson, J. Q., Thinking About Crime (New York: Basic Books, 1975) in Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Naomi, E. N., Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria, 18.
97.
Van den Haag, E., Punishing Criminals: Concerning a Very Old and Painful Question (New York: Basic Books, 1975) in Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Naomi, E. N., Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria, 16.
98.
Ibid.
99.
Ibid.
100.
See Sects. 3 and 4 of this chapter.
101.
4 Wharton, Pa., 9 (1838).
102.
(1837).
103.
Freda A., Gerhard, O. W. M., and Williams, S. L., Criminology and the Criminal Justice System (6th ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007), 424.
104.
Fogel, D., We Are the Living Proof: The Justice Model for Corrections (Cincinnati: Anderson, 1985) in Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Naomi, E. N., Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria, 20.
105.
Ibid.
106.
See Chapters 5 and 6 of this book for detail analysis.
107.
Justice Abe Fortas of the US Supreme Court defined due process In Re Gaults “due process embodied the rule of law, which was the “primary and indispensable foundation of individual freedom.” And he declared that the fact that the accused are not adults, “does not justify a kangaroo court.” ‘The Bill of Rights, in sum, protects youth as well as adults”. Quoted from The Rights of Juvenile Defendants. Available at www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/…/Chapter_20_Our_Rights. Accessed on 1 March 2013. See Article 40 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1990.
108.
See generally, Chapters 2 and 3 of the South African Child Justice Act 78 of 2008.
109.
By virtue of Section 20 of the Police Act, the police are empowered to arrest a person including a child who is reasonably suspected of having committed an offence.
110.
See generally Chapter 3 of the South Africa Child Justice Act, Sections 63(3), 65 and 80(1) (a)(b) of the Act.
111.
By Section 211 of Child Rights Act, it is the responsibility of the police to inform the parents or guardian of the arrested juvenile as soon as practicable.
112.
The Constitution recognises three exceptional circumstances when the constitutional right to personal liberty of persons including children in conflict may be inoperative. These are: (i) for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court or upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed a criminal offence or to such extent as may be reasonably necessary to prevent his committing a criminal offence; (ii) In the case of a person who has not attained the age of eighteen years, for the purpose of his education or welfare; (iii) … or vagrants, for the purpose of their care or treatment or the protection of the community. See Section 35 of the 1999 Constitution. See also Section 215(d) of the Child Rights Act which has to the effect that “the child is not deprived of his personal liberty unless he is found guilty of: (i) A serious offence involving violence against another person or (ii) Persistence in committing other serious offences and there is no other appropriate response that will protect the public safety”.
113.
See Sections 22–25 of the South Africa Child Justice Act. See also, Harms, P., Detention in Delinquency Cases, 1990–1999: 2003 Fact Sheet (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention). See also Sections 211 and 212 of the Child Rights Act which provide procedures to be followed during apprehension of a child and if need be for the child to be detained.
114.
See Sections 211(1)(c)(iii) and 211(2) of the Child Rights Act, 2003.
115.
Mwangangi, M. M., ‘The Role of Kenya Police in Juvenile Justice’. Available at www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/PDF_kenya/session2.pdf. Accessed on 4 March 2013. See Section 211 Child Rights Act.
116.
See Sections 209 and 219 of the Child Rights Act.
117.
See Section 44 of the Child Justice listed the people that should attend preliminary inquiry to include: the child, the parents and probation officer.
118.
Section 20 CYPL Kano State.
119.
See generally Part XX of the Child Rights Act. The police force being the main law enforcement agency recognised by the Constitution with a higher visibility than other agency, the police bear the onerous burden of crime prevention and law enforcement at every level of the criminal justice system. See generally Part III (B) of Chapter 6 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
120.
See Article 37(b) of the UNCRC.
121.
See Sections 209(3) and 212(1) of the Child Rights Act, 2003.
122.
Section 35(5) of the Constitution defines a “reasonable time” to mean—(a) in the case of an arrest or detention in any place, where there is a court of competent jurisdiction within a radius of forty kilometers, a period of one day and (b) in any other case, a period of two days or such longer period as in the circumstances may be considered by the court to be reasonable.
123.
See generally Section 207(1)-(3) of the Child Rights Act. It has been revealed in Chapter 5 of this study that instead of compliance with the Child Rights Act to provide for children special unit at the Police Force in Nigeria, child suspect is mingled together with women in the ‘Juvenile and Women Centres’ (JWC).
124.
See Sections 26–27 of the Child Justice Act 78 of 2008.
125.
See Section 9(1) of the South Africa Child Justice Act 75 of 2008.
126.
See Section 20 of the Child Justice Act. Ibid.
127.
See Sections 17–20 of the South Africa Child Justice Act.
128.
See Section 10 of the South Africa Child Justice Act.
129.
Oanna, W. M., ‘The Role of Social Workers Concerning Juveniles in Court’, Paper Presented at a ‘Seminar on Problem Areas in Juvenile Justice’ (Elmina: Cocoanut Grove Hotel, 2007). Available at www.judicial.gov.gh/JTI/jti_documents/Learning%20Materials/THE%20. Accessed on 4 March 2013.
130.
Ibid. See also Section 417 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
131.
See also Section 418 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
132.
Oanna, W. M., ‘The Role of Social Workers Concerning Juveniles in Court’.
133.
Social Welfare follows the laid down procedure as provided in Section 217 of the Child Rights Act.
134.
Akinseye-George, Yemi, Juvenile Justice in Nigeria (Abuja, Nigeria: Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, 2009). See also Sections 219 and 224 of the Child Rights Act.
135.
Oanna, W. Mensah, ‘The Role of Social Workers Concerning Juveniles in Court’.
136.
Akinseye-George, Yemi, Juvenile Justice in Nigeria (Abuja, Nigeria: Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, 2009). See also Sections 219 and 224 of the Child Rights Act.
137.
Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice (Lagos: Centre for Law Enforcement Education, 2001).
138.
Author’s field survey at Bauchi and Kaduna States, Nigeria, dated 11 and 13 February 2014.
139.
Section 150 of the South Africa Children’s Court No. 38 of 2005 provides a detail explanation of a “child in need of care and protection” to include among others a child who “displays behaviour which cannot be controlled by the parent or care-giver”; “lives or works on the streets or beg for a living”; or “lives in or is exposed to circumstances which may seriously harm that child’s physical, mental or social well-being”, etc.
140.
See Sections 47, 50(3) and 151(1) of the South Africa Children’s Act No. 38 of 2005.
141.
A preliminary inquiry by virtue of Section 43(1) of the South Africa Child Justice Act means “an informal pre-trial procedure which is inquisitorial in nature” for the purpose of “considering the assessment report of the probation officer”.
142.
See Section 155(2)(3) of the South Africa Children’s Act.
143.
See Section 155(4)(b) of the South Africa Children’s Act.
144.
See Section 167 of the South Africa Children’s Act. By this Subsection 1 of this section, an alternative care means “a foster care or a child and youth care centre following an order of a court in terms of this Act, Section 29 or chapter 10 of the Child Justice Act, 2008 or a temporary safe care”.
145.
See Sections 156(3)(a)(i)(ii) and 157(1)(b)(i)(ii) (2) of the South Africa Children’s Act.
146.
See Section 168(3) of the Children’s Act.
147.
See Section 170(1)(2) of the Children’s Act.
148.
See Section 171(4) of the Children’s Act.
149.
See Section 174 of the Children’s Act.
150.
See Section 175(2)(b) of the Children’s Act.
151.
See Section 178(2)(d) of the Children’s Act.
152.
See Section 187(2) of the Children’s Act.
153.
See Section 233(4) of the Children’s Act.
154.
See Department of Social Development: Framework for provision of developmental social welfare services (Draft) (Pretoria: Government Printer, 2011).
155.
See the cases of Centre for Child Law v. Minister of Social Development and others. 2011a. (North Gauteng High Court) Case No. 21726/11. Order of 10 May 2011, unreported and Centre for Child Law v. Minister of Social Development and others. 2011b. (North Gauteng High Court) Case No. 21726/11. Order of 8 June 2011, unreported.
156.
See September, R., and Dinbabo, M., ‘Gearing Up for Implementation: A New Children’s Act for South Africa’, Practice: Social Work in Action, 20(2), 113–122.
157.
See the South Africa Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR): Social Worker Shortage Undermines Effectiveness of Social Welfare Legislation (2012). Available at www.sairr.org.za. Accessed 20 October 2012.
158.
See Section 217(6) of the Child Rights Act, 2003.
159.
See Section 217 (3)(4)(5) of the Child Rights Act.
160.
The South Africa Child Justice Act No. 75 of 2008 together with the Criminal Procedure Act is used with respect to child alleged to be in conflict with the law, while the Children’s Act No. 38 of 2005 together with the Magistrates’ Act No. 32 of 1944 and Rules Board for Courts of Law Act No. 107 of 1985 is used to decide children that are in need of care and protection.
161.
See Sections 47 and 50 of the Children’s Act No. 38 of 2005.
162.
See Sections 10, 43–50 of the Child Justice Act No. 75 of 2008.
163.
See Section 217 (3)(4)(5) of the Child Rights Act.
164.
See Section 63(4) of the South African Child Justice Act.
165.
Section 155 of the Child Rights Act, 2003, has similar provision to the effect that “a child has the right to be represented by a legal practitioner and to free legal aid in the hearing and determination of any matter concerning the child in the Court”. See generally Section 217 of the Child Rights Act. This is similar to Sections 54 and 55 of the South African Children’s Act No. 38 of 2005 and Sections 80–83 of the Child Justice Act No. 75 of 2008.
166.
Ibid. See also, In Re Gault 387 U.S. 1, 42 (1967).
167.
In Applications of Johnnie J. Billie and Leroy Jewelryman, 429 P.2d699 (Ariz. 1967), it was held that where parents and petitioners were not advised of their right to counsel, detention in an industrial school was illegal. The petitioners were ordered released.
168.
See Section 149 of the Nigerian Child Rights Act, 2003, and Section 89 of the South African Child Justice Act No. 75 of 2008.
169.
(supra).
170.
In Re Gault 387 U.S. 1 (1967).
171.
See Chapter 2 of the South African Children’s Act (particularly Sections 8, 9, 10, 14 and 15) and Section 11 of the South African Child Justice Act. See also, Zaal, F. N., and Skelton, A. M., ‘Providing effective representation for children in a new constitutional era’ (1998), South African Journal on Human Rights, 14, 593.
172.
See Section 217(1) of the Child Rights Act.
173.
See Article 40 UNCRC. See also Section 210 of the Child Rights Act and Section 89 Child Justice Act 2008.
174.
See Sectins 155, 210, 215(3) and 217 of the Child Rights Act for similar provisions.
175.
Articles 18.2 and 40.1 of the Beijing Rules. See also Sections 11, 158 and 214(2)(b) of the Child Rights Act.
176.
Author’s field survey at Lagos, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Enugu, Bauchi and Ilorin in 2014.
177.
Interviews conducted by the author in 2014.
178.
This statement of the role of defence counsel in juvenile delinquency proceedings was derived from a number of sources. See, e.g., National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Juvenile Delinquency Guidelines: Improving Court Practice in Juvenile Delinquency Cases (2005); American Council of Chief Defenders, National Juvenile Defender Center, ‘Ten Core Principles for Providing Quality Delinquency Representation Through Indigent Defence Delivery Systems’ (2005); Howell, Amy, and Silverthorn, Brook, Southern Juvenile Defender Center, ‘Representing the Whole Child: A Juvenile Defender’ (2004), Training Manual IV; California Administrative Office of the Courts, ‘Effective Representation of Children in Juvenile Delinquency Court’ (2004); Juvenile Justice Bulletin, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice, ‘Access to Counsel’(2004); Katherine R. Kruse, ‘Lawyers Should be Lawyers, But What does that Mean? A Response to Aiken & Wizer & Smith’ (2004) Washington University Journal of Law and Policy; Frank E. Vandervort, Michigan, ‘When Minors Face Major Consequences: What Attorneys in Representing Children in Delinquency, Designation, and Waiver Proceedings Need to Know’ (2001) Bar Journal; National Association of Counsel for Children, ‘Recommendations for Representation of Children in Abuse and Neglect Cases’ (2001) Part IV; Barbara Butterworth, Will Rhee & Mary Ann Scali, Juvenile Defender Delinquency Notebook (2000) American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center, Chapter 2, p. 2.2; Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services, Assigned Counsel Manual: Policies and Procedures (2000) Parts III. A.4 & J 1.2; Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy, Juvenile Law Manual (1999) Chapters 1 and 3; IJA/ABA Juvenile Justice Standards, ‘Standards Relating to Private Parties’ (1996), Standard 3.1; Stephen Wizner, ‘The Child and the State: Adversaries in the Juvenile Justice System’ (1972), Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 4, 389. Available at www.ncids.org/JuvenileDefender/Role/Role%20Statement.pdf Accessed on 6 March 2013.
179.
See Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners and Practitioner Act Cap B57 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and S.I. 6 of 2007 respectively.
180.
The principle of defence counsel in juvenile proceedings is to protect the child’s constitutional rights. They do this through their practical, everyday duties ranging from interviewing the child outside of the presence of the child’s parents to objecting to inadmissible but informative evidence at adjudicatory hearings, to advocating for the least restrictive alternative at disposition, to pressing, at every stage, for the client’s expressed interests. For the purpose of this study, “stage” is broadly defined to include each step at which the state’s power intersects the child’s life, including, but not limited to, arrest, interrogation at the police station, at school or at home, initial detention hearings, the probable cause hearing and post-disposition hearings. Apart from the provisions in the 1999 Constitution on the above subject matter, the Child Rights Act, specifically in its Section 217(5), provides to the effect that upon establishing a prima facie case against the child offender, the court is under obligation to hear the child’s defence by taking the evidence of his/her witnesses.
181.
332 U.S. 596, 599–600 (1948)
182.
Haley v. Ohio (supra).
183.
387 U.S. 1 (1967). The latter case of In Re Winship 397 U.S. 358 (1970) expanded the list of mandated procedural guarantees to include the requirement that prosecutors have to prove delinquency charges beyond reasonable doubt.
184.
In Re Gault, 387 U.S. at 36.
185.
Ibid.
186.
Sterling, R. W., ‘Role of Juvenile Defence Counsel in Delinquency Court’. Available atwww.americanbar.org/…/crimjust_juvjus. Accessed on 2 March 2013. See generally Part A of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Legal Practitioners Act.
187.
Ibid. See also Part B of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Legal Practitioners Act.
188.
Sterling, R. W., ‘Role of Juvenile Defence Counsel in Delinquency Court’.
189.
Ibid.
190.
Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners; Ibid.
191.
See The American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct (Model Rules): Preamble; 1.14(a) Client with Diminished Capacity; 1.2(a) Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority between Client and Lawyer. Available at http://www.njdc.info/pdf/cfjfull/pdf and www.njdc.info/pdf/role_of_juvenile_defense_counsel.pdf. Accessed on 26 February 2013. See also Parts A and B of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Legal Practitioners Act. Ibid.
192.
This was evidenced in the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Roper v. Simmons (Supra).
193.
See The American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct (Model Rules) 1.6 Confidentiality of Information. Ibid. See also Parts A and B of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Legal Practitioners Act.
194.
Sterling, R. W., ‘Role of Juvenile Defense Counsel in Delinquency Court’.
195.
See The American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct (Model Rules) 1.1 Competence, 1.3 Diligence. Ibid. See also Parts A and B of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Legal Practitioners Act. Ibid.
196.
Puritz, P., Burrell, S., Schwartz, R., Soler, M., and Warboys, L., A Call for Justice: An Assessment of Access to Counsel and Quality of Representation in Delinquency Proceedings (Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center, 1995). Available at www.americanbar.org/…/crimjust_juvjus. Accessed on 2 March 2013.
197.
Sipho, Sibanda, and Antoinette, Lombard, ‘Challenges Faced by Social Workers Working in Child Protection Services in Implementing the Children’s Act 38 of 2005’. Available at http://socialwork.journals.ac.za/pub. Accessed 15 October, 2018.
198.
Author’s field survey at Lagos, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Enugu, Bauchi and Ilorin in 2014.
199.
Sipho, Sibanda, and Antoinette, Lombard, ‘Challenges Faced by Social Workers Working in Child Protection Services in Implementing the Children’s Act 38 of 2005’. Available at http://socialwork.journals.ac.za/pub. Accessed 15 October 2018.
200.
This has been discussed somewhere in Chapters 5 and 6 of this book.
201.
Jones, Judith B., Access to Counsel (Juvenile Justice Bulletin, 2008). Available at www.americanbar.org/…/crimjust_juvjus_13_1jwr.htm. Accessed on 2 March 2013.
202.
In particular, see Section 36(6)(c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
203.
In particular, see Sections 28(1)(h) and 35 of the Republic of South Africa Constitution, 1996.
204.
See Section 83 of the South African Child Justice Act.
205.
See In Re Gault, 387 U.S. at 42. See also Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938); Carnley v. Cochran, 369 U.S. 506 (1962); United States ex rel. Brown v. Fay, 242 F. Supp. 273 (D.C.S.D.N.Y.1965). See also State ex rel. Juvenile Dept. Linn County v. Anzaldua, 109 Or App 617 (1991), State v. Twitty, 85 Or App 98, 102 (1987). The Supreme Court held in U.S. v. Padilla, 819 F. 2d 952, 956 (10th Cir. 1987): there must be “a showing on the record that the defendant who elects to conduct his own defence had some sense of the magnitude of the undertaking and the hazards inherent in self-representation when he made the election”. It was also held in Von Moltke v. Gillies, 332 U.S. 708, 723–724 (1948): the defendant must have an apprehension of the nature of the charges, the statutory offences included within them, the range of allowable punishments there under, possible defences to the charges, and circumstances in mitigation thereof, and all other facts essential to a broad understanding of the whole matter. In a similar case of State v. Johnson, 112 Ohio St. 3d 210, 2006-Ohio-6404, 858 N.E.2d 1144, 100: the record must reflect that the defendant who elects to represent himself was made aware of the dangers of self-representation, so that the record will establish that “he knows what he is doing”.
206.
See State ex rel Juv. Dept. v. Afanasiev, 66 Or App 531 (1984). In Re Haggard, 3d Dist. Nos. 2–08–20, 2–08–21, 2–08–22, 2–08–23, 2009-Ohio-3821. The court found that the minor validly waived his right to counsel at a probation violation hearing. But there was no recorded finding that waiver was made at the dispositional hearing immediately following the probation violation hearing. The court reversed the dispositional hearing and remanded for a new hearing with reiteration of the right to counsel. In contrast to that is In Re I.S.P., 4th Dist. No. 09-CA-37, 2010-Ohio-410. The defendant was charged with numerous probation violations. At all of his hearings at which his mother was present, the court advised the defendant and his mother of the right to counsel. The court then made a recorded finding that showed the waiver was voluntary, knowing and intelligent. The defendant was familiar with the juvenile court system and the trial court engaged the child to ensure he understood his rights and the charges. The trial court judgement was affirmed.
207.
Child Justice Act Sections 83–85.
208.
Ibid. See also State v. Verna, 9 Or App 620, 626 (1972); see also State ex rel. Juvenile Dept. Linn County v. Anzaldua, 109 Or App 617 (1991). In Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. (2012) at 19, the US Supreme Court again relied on physiological differences in the decision-making processes of children versus adults, and noted that “indeed, it is the odd legal rule that does not have some form of exception for children”.
209.
Ibid.
210.
In Re C.S., 115 Ohio St.3d 267, 2007-Ohio-4919, 874 N.E.2d 117. Held that: (1) in a delinquency proceeding, a juvenile may waive his constitutional right to counsel, subject to certain standards, if he is counseled and advised by his parent, custodian or guardian; (2) if the juvenile is not counseled by his parent, guardian or custodian and has not consulted with an attorney, he may not waive his right to counsel; (3) a judge must appoint counsel for a juvenile if there is a conflict between the juvenile and his parent, custodian or guardian on the question of whether counsel should be waived; (4) a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis is the proper test to be used in ascertaining whether there has been a valid waiver of counsel by a juvenile; (5) the judge must consider a number of factors and circumstances, including the age, intelligence and education of the juvenile; the juvenile’s background and experience generally and in the court system specifically; the presence or absence of the juvenile’s parent, guardian or custodian; the language used by the court in describing the juvenile’s rights; the juvenile’s conduct; the juvenile’s emotional stability; and the complexity of the proceedings; and (6) the waiver of the right to counsel must be made in open court, recorded, and in writing. Also, the court clarified that a parent has no authority to waive the juvenile’s right to counsel. The minor signed a 7-page waiver, but the court reversed the adjudication because the waiver did not comply with Juv. R. 29 or R.C. 2151.352—the minor never consulted a parent or guardian prior to waiving right to counsel.
211.
See the preamble and Sections 7 and 9 of the Legal Aid Act, Cap L9 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 201. See also, the proviso to Section 83(2) of the South Africa Child Justice Act and Section 55 of the Children’s Act; Sections 2 and 3A of the South African Legal Aid Act No. 22 of 1969; Botha NO and Others v. MEC for Education, Western Cape and Others (unreported, Case No. 24611/11, Western Cape High Court).
212.
See generally Ferguson and Douglas, ‘A Study of Juvenile Waiver’ (1970), San Diego Law Review, 39.
213.
Author’s field survey at Lagos, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Enugu, Bauchi and Ilorin in 2014.
214.
Interview conducted by the author in Bauchi State, Nigeria, dated 11 February 2014.
215.
Plea bargains are not inherently bad or even detrimental to the youth as long as they are not made for expediency’s sake and the youth clearly is guilty.
216.
See Child Right Act, 2003, Section 209.
217.
Ibid., see Section 215(2).
218.
See Section 42 of the South African Child Justice Act.
219.
See Section 53(1) of the Child Justice Act.
220.
Ibid., see Section 219.
221.
Ibid., see Section 215(1)(b).
222.
See Section 61 of the South Africa Child Justice Act and Section 70 of the Children’s Act. See generally the cases of S v. M (Centre for Child Law as Amicus Curiae) (2008) 3 SA 232 (CC); Dikoko v. Mokhatia (2006) 6 SA 235 (CC) and Le Roux and Others v. Dey (Freedom of Expression Institute and Restorative Justice Centre as Amici Curiae) (2011) 3 SA 274 (CC). See also, Sloth-Nielsen, J., and Gallinetti, J., ‘Just Say Sorry? Ubuntu, Africanisation and the Child Justice System in the Child Justice Act 75 of 2008’ (2011), Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 14(4), 63.
223.
See Section 61 of the Child Justice Act.
224.
See Section 69 of the Children’s Act.
225.
See Section 71 of the Children’s Act. See also, South African Law Commission Project 110, Review of the Child Care Act. Discussion Paper 103 (2001), 1157.
226.
See Section 49 of the Children’s Act.
227.
See Section 72 of the Children’s Act.
228.
These are concepts that embrace the notion of restorative justice which involves a balancing of rights and responsibilities. The purpose of these concepts is to identify responsibilities, meet needs and promote healing. See Skelton, A. M., ‘Juvenile Justice Reform: Children’s Rights and Responsibilities versus Crime Control’, in C. J. Davel (ed.), Children’s Rights in Transitional Society (1999), 93.
229.
See Section 223(1)(c) of the Child Rights Act.
230.
See Section 223(1)(d) of the Child Rights Act.
231.
See Section 223(1)(g) of the Child Rights Act.
232.
See Sections 220(2) and 223(1)(e) of the Child Rights Act.
233.
See Section 242(2)(a) of the Child Rights Act.
234.
See Section 225(1)(a) of the Child Rights Act.
235.
See Section 223(1)(f) of the Child Rights Act.
236.
See Section 223(2)(a) of the Child Rights Act.
237.
See Section 248(1)(a) of the Child Rights Act.
238.
The findings from the author’s fieldwork in Nigeria (Lagos, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Enugu, Bauchi and Ilorin), 2014, revealed the ranking of the custodial institutions in Nigeria thus: Borstal institution was ranked 1st in the juvenile justice administration with 663 out of 1258 respondents representing (53%). With 554 (44%) out of 1258 respondents, remand home was ranked 2nd in the juvenile justice administration. With 517 (41%) respondents, government-approved school was ranked 3^rd in juvenile justice administration. This was followed by prison with 501 (39.8%) and lastly the police cell with 457 (36%).
239.
Interview conducted by the Author at Kaduna, Bauchi and Ilorin in 2014.
240.
Author’s field survey at Lagos, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Enugu, Bauchi and Ilorin in 2014.
241.
Abrifor et al., ‘Differences, Trend And Pattern Recidivism Among Inmates in Selected Nigerian Prisons’ (2010), European Scientific Journal.
242.
Falobi, F., ‘Empowering Prison Inmates’, 2009. Available at http://www.independentngonline.com/. Accessed on 21 September 2009.
243.
Wilson, H., ‘Curbing Recidivism in Our Society’, 2009. Available at http://www.pioneerng.com/article.php?title=Curbing_Recidivism_In_Our_Societyandid=2765. Accessed on 20 December 2009.
244.
Soyombo, O., Sociology and Crime Control: That We May Live in Peace, 2009.
245.
Ugwuoke, C. U., Criminology: Explaining Crime in the Nigerian Context (2010), 23.
246.
See Sections 250(8)(f) and 259(1)(a) of the Child Rights Act.
247.
In particular, see Section 69(1)(d) of the South Africa Child Justice Act.
248.
See Section 72 of the Child Justice Act.
249.
See Section 73 of the Child Justice Act.
250.
See Section 74 of the Child Justice Act.
251.
See Section 75 of the Child Justice Act.
252.
See Section 77 of the Child Justice Act.
253.
See Rendleman, D. R., ‘Parens Patriae: From Chancery to Juvenile Court’ (1971), South Carolina Law Review, 23, 205–259 in Akinseye-George, Yemi, Juvenile Justice in Nigeria (Abuja, Nigeria: Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, 2009). See Parts XIII and XX of the Child Rights Act, 2003.
254.
See Section 156 of the Nigerian Child Rights Act, 2003. See also Section 63(2) of the South African Child justice Act and Section 56 of the Children’s Act which provides for “Children’s Court proceedings to be closed, and to be conducted only in the presence of those persons whose attendance is necessary, in order to protect privacy and confidentiality in family issues that generally are not matters of public interest”. For instance, in the case of Gold v. Commissioner of Child Welfare, Durban (1978) 2 SA 301, “Persons in loco parentis are recognised as necessary persons that can be present at a sitting of the Children’s Court”.
255.
See Section 209 of the Nigerian Child Rights Act and Section 60(3) of the South African Children’s Act.
256.
See Section 213(2) of the Child Rights Act.
257.
543 U.S. 551 (2005)
258.
Ernestine Gray’s comment on the proposed legislation in the light of standards and policy adopted by the American Bar Association on the Administration of Criminal Justice, 12 May 2004. Available at www.njdc.info/pdf/18_LAaba.pdf. Accessed on 7 March 2013.
259.
Analysis of the Author’s field survey and interviews conducted at Lagos, Kaduna, Port Harcourt, Enugu, Bauchi and Ilorin in 2014.

References

Abrifor et.al., ‘Differences, Trend and Pattern Recidivism Among Inmates in Selected Nigerian Prisons’ (2010), European Scientific Journal, 8(24), 25–44.
Google Scholar
Adewoye, O., The Judicial System in Southern Nigeria 1854–1954 (London: Longman, 1977).
Google Scholar
Ahire, P. T., Imperial Policing Milton Keynes (Open University Press, 1991) in Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice.
Google Scholar
Ajisafe Moore, E. A., ‘The Laws and Customs of the Yoruba People in Abeokuta Nigeria’ (Fola Bookshops, 2010) in Oduwole, E. O., ‘Punishment as a Form of Legal Order in an African Society’.
Google Scholar
Akinseye-George, Yemi, Juvenile Justice in Nigeria (Abuja, Nigeria: Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, 2009).
Google Scholar
Alemika, E. E. O., ‘The Smoke Screen, Rhetoric and Reality of Penal Incarceration in Nigeria’ (1988a), International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 7(1), 137–149.
Google Scholar
Alemika, E. E. O., ‘Policing and Perception of Police in Nigeria’ (1988b) Police Studies: International Review of Police Development, 11(4), 161–176.
Google Scholar
Alemika E. E. O, ‘Socio-Economic and Criminology Attributes of Convicts in Two Nigerian Prisons’ (1988c), Journal of Criminal Justice, 16(3), 197–207.
Article Google Scholar
Alemika, E. E. O., ‘Colonialism, State and Policing in Nigeria’ (1993), Crime Law and Social Change, 187–219.
Article Google Scholar
Alemika, E. E. O., and Chukwuma, I. C., Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria: Philosophy and Practice (Lagos: Centre for Law Enforcement Education, 2001).
Google Scholar
Alice Saffy, Jacqueline ‘A Historical Perspective of the Youthful Offender’, in C. Bezuidenhout and S. Joubert (eds.), Child and Youth Misbehaviour in South Africa (2003).
Google Scholar
Barbara Butterworth, Will Rhee, and Scali, Mary Ann, American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center, Juvenile Defender Delinquency Notebook, Chapter 2, §2.2 (2000), Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services, Assigned Counsel Manual.
Google Scholar
Beccaria, C., On Crimes and Punishment (reprinted; Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill).
Google Scholar
Behlmer, G., Friends of the Family: The English Home and Its Guardians (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998). Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html.
Bekker, J. C., ‘Children and Young Persons in Indigenous Law’, in J. A. Robinson (ed.), The Law of Children and Young Persons in South Africa (1997), 193.
Google Scholar
Berlins, M., and Wansell, G., Caught in the Act (London: Macmillan, 1974), 1.
Google Scholar
Bosman-Swanepoel, H. M., and Wessels, P. J., A Practical Approach to the Child Care Act (1995), 5.
Google Scholar
Bradley, K. M., ‘Juvenile Delinquency, the Juvenile Courts and the Settlement Movement 1908–50: Basil Henriques and Toynbee Hall’ (2008), Twentieth Century British History, 19, 133–135. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html.
Article Google Scholar
Bradley, Kate, Juvenile Delinquency and the Evolution of the British Juvenile Courts, c. 1900–1950.
Google Scholar
Chris, C., & Robb, W., Juvenile Justice: An Australian Perspective (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 9.
Google Scholar
Clapp, E. J., Mothers of All Children: Women Reformers and the Rise of Juvenile Courts in Progressive Era America (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1998), 89, 45 and 120.
Google Scholar
du Plessis, Lourens, M., ‘A Background to Drafting the Chapter on Fundamental Rights’, in B. de Villiers (ed.), Birth of a Constitution (1994a), 90–91.
Google Scholar
du Plessis, Lourens, M., ‘The Genesis of the Chapter on Fundamental Rights I South Africa’s Transitional Constitution’ (1994b), SA Public Law, 9, 10.
Google Scholar
du Plessis, Lourens, M., and Corder, H., Understanding South Africa’s Transitional Bill of Rights (1994), 38, 46, 185–187 (Bill of Rights).
Google Scholar
Eakelaar, J., ‘Child Endangerment and Child Protection in England and Wales’, in M. Rosenheim, F. Zimring, D. Tanenhaus, and B. Dohm (eds.), A Century of Juvenile Justice (2002).
Google Scholar
Falobi, F., ‘Empowering Prison Inmates’, 2009. Available at http://www.independentngonline.com/.
Ferguson and Douglas, ‘A Study of Juvenile Waiver’ (1970), San Diego Law Review, 7, 39.
Google Scholar
Fogel, D., We Are the Living Proof: The Justice Model for Corrections (Cincinnati: Anderson, 1985).
Google Scholar
Freda, A., Gerhard, O. W. M., and Williams, S. L., Criminology and the Criminal Justice System (6th ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill, 2007).
Google Scholar
Garlard, D., The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society (Oxford and London: Oxford University Press, 2002).
Google Scholar
Geffen, Irene, The Laws of South Africa Affecting Women and Children (1928).
Google Scholar
Goldson, B., and Muncie, J., Youth, Crime and Justice: Critical Issues (London: Sage, 2006), 202.
Google Scholar
Goldson, B., The New Youth Justice (Lyme Regis: Russell House, 2000).
Google Scholar
Harms, P., Detention in Delinquency Cases, 1990–1999. 2003. Fact Sheet. (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention).
Google Scholar
Hendrick, H., Child Welfare: England 1872–1989 (London: Routledge, 1994), 121–125. Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html.
Howell, Amy, and Silverthorn, Brook, Southern Juvenile Defender Centre, ‘Representing the Whole Child: A Juvenile Defender’ (2004), Training Manual IV.
Google Scholar
Idowu, E. B., Olodumare: God in Yoruba Belief (Ibadan: Longman, 1962) in Oduwole, E. O., ‘Punishment as a Form of Legal Order in an African Society’.
Google Scholar
Ikenga, K. E. O., ‘Crime and Punishment in Igbo Customary Law: The Challenge of Nigerian Criminal Jurisprudence’. Available at www.ajol.info/index.php/og/article/download/57917/46285.
Ikenga, K. E. O., ‘The Principles and Practice of Justice in Traditional Igbo Jurisprudence’. Available at www.ajol.info/index.php/og/article/viewFile/52335/40960.
Jones, Judith B., ‘Access to Counsel in Juvenile Justice Bulletin’, 2004. Available at www.americanbar.org/…/crimjust_juvjus_13_1jwr.htm.
Kentucky Department of Public Advocacy, Juvenile Law Manual (1999), Chapters 1 & 3; IJA/ABA Juvenile Justice Standards, ‘Standards Relating to Private Parties’ (1996), Standard 3.1.
Google Scholar
Kruse, Katherine R., ‘Lawyers Should Be Lawyers, But What Does That Mean? A Response to Aiken & Wizer & Smith’ (2004), Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 14, 49.
Google Scholar
Ladan, M. T., Rights of the Child in Nigeria: An Overview in Individual Rights and Communal Responsibility in Nigeria (Abuja, Nigeria: National Human Rights Commission, 1998).
Google Scholar
Lerman, P., ‘Policing Juveniles in London, Shifts in Guiding Discretion, 1893–1968’ (1984), British Journal of Criminology, 24, 168–184; 175–176.
Article Google Scholar
Lewis, J., The Voluntary Sector, the State and Social Work in Britain: The Charity Organisation Society/Family Welfare Association Since 1869 (London: Edward Elgar, 1995). Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html.
Logan, A., ‘A Suitable Person for Suitable Cases: The Gendering of Juvenile Courts in England c. 1910–39’ (2005), Twentieth Century British History, 16, 129–145.
Google Scholar
Maithufi, Ignatius, ‘The Best Interest of the Child and African Customary Law’, in C. J. Davel (ed.), Introduction to Child Law in South Africa (2000).
Google Scholar
Mbiti, J. S., African Philosophy and Religions (Oxford: Heinemann, 1982).
Google Scholar
Midgley, James, Children on Trial: A Study of Juvenile Justice (1975), 53.
Google Scholar
Mwangangi, M. M., The Role of Kenya Police in Juvenile Justice. Available at www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/PDF_kenya/session2.pdf.
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Constitutional Rights Project (CRP), Penal Reform International (PRI), and UNICEF. Available at http://www.Cleen.org/Juvenile%20justice%20Report.pdf.
Nwanna, Chinwe R., and Akpan, Naomi, E. N., Research Findings of Juvenile Justice Administration in Nigeria (Lagos: Constitutional Right Project [CRP], 2003).
Google Scholar
Oanna, W. M., ‘The Role of Social Workers Concerning Juveniles in Court’, Paper Presented at a ‘Seminar on Problem Areas in Juvenile Justice’ at Cocoanut Grove Hotel, Elmina 2007. Available at www.judicial.gov.gh/JTI/jti_documents/Learning%20Materials/THE%20.
Odekunle, F., ‘The Nigeria Police Force: A Preliminary Assessment of Functional Performance’ (1979), International Journal of Sociology of Law, 6, 73–78.
Google Scholar
Oduwole, E. O., ‘Punishment as a Form of Legal Order in an African Society’ (2011), International Research Journals, 2(5), 1124–1129.
Google Scholar
Okonkwo, C. O., Nwankwo, C., and Ibhawoh, B., Administration of Juvenile Justice in Nigeria (1st ed.; Lagos: Constitutional Rights Project [CRP], 1997).
Google Scholar
Parry-Jones, William L., ‘The History of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry: Its Present Day Relevance’ (1989), Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 30, 3–11 in Bradley, Kate, Juvenile Delinquency and The Evolution of the British Juvenile Courts, c. 1900–1950.
Google Scholar
Prins, Herschel, Offenders, Deviants or Patients? Explorations in Clinical Criminology (4th ed.; London and New York: Routledge and Taylor & Francis Group, 2010), 68–101.
Google Scholar
Puritz, P., Burrell, S., Schwartz, R., Soler, M., and Warboys, L., A Call for Justice: An Assessment of Access to Counsel and Quality of Representation in Delinquency Proceedings (Washington, DC: American Bar Association Juvenile Justice Center, 1995). Available at www.americanbar.org/…/crimjustjuvjus.
Rendleman, D. R., ‘Parens Patriae: From Chancery to Juvenile Court’ (1971), South Carolina Law Review, 23, 205–259.
Google Scholar
Roberts, Cynthia H., Juvenile Delinquency: Causes and Effect (Yale-Haven Teachers Institute, 1986). Available at http://www.yale.edu/yhnt/curriculum.
Robyn, Kriel, ‘Boko Haram Favours Women, Children as Suicide Bombers, Study Reveals’, CNN, 11 August 2017. Available at https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/10/africa/boko-haram-women-children-suicide-bombers/index.html.
September, R., and Dinbabo, M., Gearing Up for Implementation: A New Children’s Act for South Africa. Practice: Social Work in Action, 20(2), 113–122.
Article Google Scholar
Sinclair, June D., and Bedil, Susan, ‘Law of Persons’ (1983), Annual Survey of South Africa Law, 73.
Google Scholar
Sipho, Sibanda, and Antoinette, Lombard, ‘Challenges Faced by Social Workers Working in Child Protection Services in Implementing the Children’s Act 38 of 2005’. Available at http://socialwork.journals.ac.za/pub.
Skelton Thesis, 392–395; Dutschke, Mira, Defining Children’s Constitutional Rights to Social Services. A Project 28 Working Paper (2006), 48–52 (Defining).
Google Scholar
Skelton, A. M., ‘Juvenile Justice Reform: Children’s Rights and Responsibilities Versus Crime Control’, in C. J. Davel (ed.), Children’s Rights in Transitional Society (Pretoria: Protea Book House, 1999).
Google Scholar
Sloth-Nielsen, J., and Gallinetti, J., ‘Just Say Sorry? Ubuntu, Africanisation and the Child Justice System in the Child Justice Act 75 of 2008’ (2011), Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 14(4), 63.
Google Scholar
Sloth-Nielson, J., ‘Chicken Soup or Chainsaws: Some Implications of the Constitutionalisation of Children’s Rights in South Africa’, Acta Juridica (1996), 6–12.
Google Scholar
Soyombo, O., Sociology and Crime Control: That We May Live in Peace, 2009.
Google Scholar
Sterling, R. W., ‘Role of Juvenile Defence Counsel in Delinquency Court’. Available at www.americanbar.org/…/crimjust_juvjus. Accessed on 2 March 2013. See generally Part A of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Legal Practitioners Act.
Tamuno, T. N., The Police in Modern Nigeria (Ibadan: University Press, 1970), 45; Milner, W. B., ‘Lower Class Culture as Generating Milieu of Gang Delinquency’ (1958), Journal of Social Issues, 14, 5–19.
Google Scholar
Theal, G. M., History of South Africa Since 1795: The Cape Colony from 1795 to 1828 (Vol. 5, 1964), 286–288.
Google Scholar
Ugwuoke, C. U., Criminology: Explaining Crime in the Nigerian Context (Great AP Express Publishers, 2010), 23.
Google Scholar
Van den Haag, E., Punishing Criminals: Concerning a Very Old and Painful Question (Basic Books: New York, 1975).
Google Scholar
Van der Spuy, E., Scharf W., and Lever, J., ‘The Politics of Youth Crime and Justice in South Africa’, in C. Sumner (ed.), The Blackwell Companion to Criminology (2004).
Google Scholar
Vandervort, Frank E., ‘When Minors Face Major Consequences: What Attorneys in Representing Children in Delinquency, Designation, and Waiver Proceedings Need to Know’ (2001), Bar Journal, 80(9), 36–41.
Google Scholar
Whitehead, P., and Statham, R., The History of Probation: Politics, Power and Cultural Change 1876–2005 (Crayford). Available at http://www.history.ac.uk/ihr/Focus/welfare/articles/bradleyk.html.
Wilson, H., Curbing Recidivism in Our Society, 2009. Available at http://www.pioneerng.com/article.php?title=Curbing_Recidivism_In_Our_Societyandid=2765.
Wilson, J. Q., Thinking About Crime (New York: Basic Books, 1997).
Google Scholar
Wizner, Stephen, ‘The Child and the State: Adversaries in the Juvenile Justice System’ (1972), Columbia Human Rights Law Review, 4, 389.
Google Scholar
Zaal, F. N., and Skelton, A. M., ‘Providing Effective Representation For Children In A New Constitutional Era’ (1998), South African Journal on Human Rights, 14, 593.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria
Mariam Adepeju Abdulraheem-Mustapha

Authors

Mariam Adepeju Abdulraheem-Mustapha
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Abdulraheem-Mustapha, M.A. (2020). The Nature of Child Justice Administration. In: Child Justice Administration in Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19015-6_3

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19015-6_3
Published: 30 May 2019
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19014-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19015-6
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics