Nowadays, our society is becoming complex. When we read newspaper, listen to the radio or watch television, there is no doubt that some news are related to crimes, for example, drug trafficking, indecent assault, wounding, gang violence, criminal intimidation, robbery, burglary, criminal damage, triad activities and so on. An alarming picture appears, some of the crimes mentioned above are piquant youngsters; some cases (e.g. Selling pirated Vcds) involve some youngsters as young as eleven or twelve years old.
If a young man has broken the law, they will be prosecuted under the teenage Offenders Ordinance. As a public worker, we will encounter similar situations or enquiries in our daily practices, so it is very leading for us to equip some knowledge and understandings of the ordinance related to teenage offenders.
Angeles Drug Los Rehab
The Spirit and ideas underlining the teenage Offenders Ordinance
Every society should admit that some kind of people are vulnerable, they are assuredly under threats, attacks, illnesses and so on. No man will assume children are strong enough and able to act or to think as a wholesome adult. They must be protected and contribute as much opportunities as to invent their morality, body and skills.
Law is no exception from the above concepts. If we take a look at the ordinances about crimes related to teenage offenders, we may be assuredly impressed by the relatively lenient treatments or punishments for these offenders.
So who can be called as a child or young person? And whom the teenage Offenders Ordinance will affect? agreeing to teenage Offenders Ordinance (Cap. 226 Sec. 2), a "child" means a man who is, in the conception of the court having cognizance of any case in relation to such person, under the age of 14 years. A "young person" means a man who is 14 years of age or upwards and under the age of 16 years and it is clearly stated that no child under the age of 7 years can be guilty of an offence.
If a young man has violated the law, they will ordinarily be trial in the teenage Court; no man shall be gift at any sitting of the teenage Court except officers or any persons directly related to the case concerned. We can see clearly the teenage are best protected from other or covering disturbances and any things do are trying to minimize the psychological impacts on them.
There is special disunion of children and young persons in police stations, courts and course in the teenage Courts too. Some restrictions are imposed on the punishments of the children and young persons; for example, no child shall be sentenced to imprisonment or committed to prison in default of payment of a fine, damages, or costs. No young man shall be sentenced to imprisonment if he can be suitably dealt within any other way and even if he should be sentenced to imprisonment, he shall not be allowed to join together with adult prisoners.
As we can see clearly from the above legal concepts about teenage offenders, it is not hard to notice some ideas and spirits are underlining the ordinance. As our society recognize child and young man are still developing their thinking capacity and their cognitive potential are not well enough to distinguish what is right or wrong, what is moral or immoral and what is offences or not. Personally speaking, it is suitable to protect them from the psychological impacts as much as inherent when they are under the criminal proceedings or prosecution.
Rather than sending the young offenders into the jail, there are many other options ordinarily available to courts for the purposes of rehabilitating the young offenders between seven and 14 years of age, for example, the society sustain aid scheme, the police superintendent's discretionary scheme and so on. We should note that the options available to a court in dealing with the young offenders focus in general on resumption rather than punishment, it reflects the society ordinarily agree that young people should be given opportunities and opening to accurate their wrong doing. As these young people becoming mature, they will contemplate there are still opening for them to remedy what they have done wrong before and relatively lenient punishments will minimize the opening of ruining their life.
Adequacy of the teenage Offenders Ordinance
In Hong Kong, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is statute based. It shall be conclusively presumed that no child under the age of 7 can be guilty of an offence. It creates in Hong Kong a conclusive or irrebuttable presumption that a child is doli incapax (incapable of committing a crime), but over the age of seven, in respect of a child aged between seven and 14 years, Hong Kong Sar follows the common rule established in medieval England that a rebuttable presumption will apply, the presumption can be rebutted by the prosecution on proof beyond uncostly doubt that, at the time of the offence, the child was well aware that his or her act was seriously wrong, and not merely naughty or mischievous. When this presumption is rebutted or removed, full criminal responsibility will be imposed on the child who may then be charged, prosecuted and convicted for any offence allegedly committed.
As the concepts mentioned above, it seem the child aged between seven and 14 years are still being protected from the doli incapax, except some rare circumstances, but I just want to point out that the criminal procedures are long and complicate, it will generate numerous psychological pressures for the young people being prosecuted or investigated. During the year of enjoyable childhood, they suffered from these pressure and the proceedings may affect their studies too.
In many other developed countries, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is higher than Hong Kong's, it can make sure more children will not be under the complex legal prosecution, it is not only sell out the pressure they will suffer, but also help to sell out the legal costs.
Most children in Hong Kong begin their kindergarten education at the age of three or four. School attendance is compulsory for those at the age of six or 15. School are required not only to contribute scholastic training for their students, but are also tasked to invent their reflective and requisite thinking, moral attitudes and public values. They are in case,granted with opportunities to custom moral values and make moral decision under teachers' guidance. When the children are seven years old, they have already received some four years of formal education (two years in kindergarten and other two years in original schooling). Personally speaking, it is risky to assume that when a child attained seven years old, they must by then have had inculcated in them the conception of "right" and "wrong" and the requisite "moral attitudes" and "social values" requisite for their recognition that a distinct act is a "serious wrong" in the commonplace sense of the term.
It can also be argued that the enhanced educational opportunities available to today's children mean that they reach public maturity more swiftly than their counterparts in earlier times, and are capable of distinguishing right from wrong at a young age, children nowadays might be seen as more sophisticated than their predecessors, but I think best education does not necessarily warrant a greater readiness to distinguish right from wrong because the children nowadays might also subject to greater levels of misinformation, which may impede their potential to distinguish right from wrong. Also the gift education ideas places too much emphasis on intellectual amelioration at the expense of moral development. I think Hong Kong can consider rising its age of criminal responsibility.
In order to sell out the opening that adult using this legal loopholes, severe punishments should be implemented to safeguard the law rather than severely punish the teenage being used and in the expense of their enjoyable childhood.
Changes over the teenage Offenders Ordinance
In up-to-date years, there have been calls there for the minimum age of criminal responsibility to be raised. Those favoring a change argue that it is undesirable to subject young children who are still socially and mentally teenage to the full panoply of criminal proceedings, with their attendant sanctions and stigma.
On the other hands, calls for a reveal of the law governing the age of criminal responsibility in Hong Kong are undoubtfully in response to the teenage offences in up-to-date years. It reflects our society is no longer tolerant the crimes committed by the youngsters. Those who favor to lower of the gift minimum age of criminal responsibility argue that bring those young delinquents into the criminal justice ideas in their formative years provides an opening for systematic rehabilitation. Sanctions imposed on a child sell out the likelihood that he will invent a life long pattern of criminal behavior.
I hope we will not take the problems as a uncomplicated question, don't simply think when they commit crimes, criminal justice will solve all these problems. Many of the youngsters are the victims under controlled by the triad societies or syndicates. They don't know how to resist the threats or financial temptation from them. If we understand more about the crux of the problems, do something to deter it from happening; it is more sufficient and beneficial. We can pass heavy sentences to those adults using teenagers to commit crimes. Also, a child cannot be presumed to know the nature of the act simply because other children of his age and background would commonly be held to possess such knowledge.
Social Impacts made by the teenage Offenders Ordinance
Nowadays, the gift minimum age of criminal responsibility that children in their formative years should not be made subject to criminal proceedings as the trauma caused may be damaging. It not only provides a framework of rules, which rule or recognize what are suitable patterns of behavior within the society, but also avoid undesirable to enforce the stigma of conviction on a child. Apart from being unfair and inappropriate to subject a seven year old to the traumatic and confusing sense of appearing in court, it is also avoiding other undesirable result of persecuting and convicting a young child that he will bear the stigma for the rest of his life of wrongs committed at a young age. On conviction the child or young man will be left with a criminal record, which may adversely affect him in later life, it may at last lead him towards a criminal occupation and alienation from the society.
The impact is obvious, it implies that we have belief in the education or resumption services. We keep the faith that people can change or able to learn from the errors. When our society accepts errors and hold an open mind towards human, the society can develop towards a harmony environment.
juvenile Offenders Ordinance
No comments:
Post a Comment