We are guilty of many errors and many faults, but our worst crime is abandoning the children, neglecting the foundation of life. Many of the things we need can wait, the child cannot, right now is the time his bones are being formed, his blood is being made and his senses are being developed. To him we cannot answer ‘tomorrow’. His name is ‘today’.”

In the final chapter of “Folk Devils and Moral Panics”, Stanley Cohen states:

“The intellectual poverty and total lack of imagination in our society’s response to its adolescent trouble makers during the last twenty years, is manifest in the way this response compulsively repeats itself and fails each time to come to terms with the real ‘problem’ that confronts it.”

The real ‘problem’ which is confronting the guardians of juvenile justice is ‘why juveniles cannot be stopped at committing crimes in the first place?’ In this context prevention of juvenile crimes should be the prime focus and organising theme at all stages of the juvenile justice system. The present paper after analysing the concept of juvenile delinquency and theories of its causation seeks to highlight the way in which an effort can be made to facilitate the prevention of juvenile crimes.

The Concept of Juvenile Delinquency

Juvenile delinquency is an important public health problem that contributes to the morbidity and mortality of adolescents as well as places a significant economic burden on society. It is a complex social problem that significantly impacts all members and processes of a social structure. In India, juvenile delinquency is on the increase during the past two or three decades due to changes in the cultural pattern of the people, urbanisation and industrialisation showing highest incidence in the children above fifteen years of age and it is to be found more common in boys.1 There are a number of other factors leading to juvenile delinquency, notably maladjustment born out of a disturbed child-parent relationship, mother-deprivation, broken or neglected homes, poverty, lack of moral values, problems of adolescence, superiority or inferiority complexes etc. Television, radio, press and cinema have also often been held responsible for the increase in crime and violence among school children. The consensus among practitioners and researchers is that juvenile delinquency is a dynamic, multifaceted problem with numerous potentially causal factors. In addition to the previously stated contributing factors, there are several theories that attempt to explain why juveniles engage in criminal behaviour. Current research suggests that delinquent behaviour is learned behaviour and not genetically encoded. Two of the most prominent theories are the Differential Association Theory and the Social Control Theory. Shoemaker’s Differential Associational Theory relies on three fundamental assumptions. First, this theory assumes that all behaviour that is not genetically derived is learned behaviour. The second assumption states that the acquisition of behaviour occurs in relatively small and informal groups. The final assumption maintains that behaviour develops from a person’s entire life experience as a whole as well as from particular instances and recent events. Differential Associational Theory points out that if a child displays delinquent behaviour then he/she ultimately learned that behaviour from the people closest to him/her. Clearly this theory supports investigation of delinquency within and through the context of the family, close peer groups and close social groups. The second notable theory, Social Control Theory was proposed by Curran and Renzetti. Social Control Theory suggests that a person’s ties or bonds to social institutions such as family, church, school, etc. prevent him or her from pursuing criminal activity. This theory is based on the concept that people commit crime because it is the easiest, most efficient; most gratifying way to satisfy one’s needs and/or wants. Therefore, if children are relatively unattached to elements of their surrounding social institutions, they are more likely to become juvenile offenders.

Juvenile Justice Legislation

Juvenile Justice’ is generally understood as a notion of fairness and justice and an alternative system of dealing with young offenders through laws. Here the emphasis is on protective and restorative practices. According to the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 the offenders should be tried by the juvenile court and the juvenile police. The majority of the State Governments have set up a Juvenile Wing within the police force to deal with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act. Though there are institutional facilities and services for juvenile trial, care, protection and rehabilitation within the present legislative framework, these provisions are not adequate to meet the new challenges of child crimes. Despite the progressive features of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 a lot of work needs to be accomplished at the ground level to combat the growing menace of juvenile crimes.

Rage in the Classroom

An elite school in Gurgaon hit the headlines recently when a student of Class VIII was shot dead by two of his classmates. Such an incident is not uniquely Indian. It is a global phenomenon and the shooting in Gurgaon School is reminiscent of many such dastardly shootouts in different schools abroad. At the Gutenbarg Grammar School in Germany, the killer gunned down thirteen teachers, two children and one policeman before shooting himself. This was described as ‘a national tragedy and Germany’s worst post-war massacre’.

There has been a steep increase worldwide in cases of crime and violence among school children both in terms of volume and complexity. It is one of the most sensitive and delicate issues that pose a serious challenge both to the developed and developing countries.

Prevention as the Focus

Prevention of juvenile crime occupies an important place in the juvenile justice system. The term ‘prevention’ in the criminal justice system refers to any kind of activity or effort done by an individual or a group, public or private that forestalls and minimises the incidence of one or more criminal acts. Juvenile delinquency develops and manifests within a complex constellation of factors as discussed above. Therefore, the prevention and intervention efforts should be theory based, multi-component and multi-system. The emphasis should be on empirically supported programmes that have identified key malleable risk factors in children, family, schools and neighbourhood especially drug abuse and violence. The role of the family and the parents is of vital importance in preventing juvenile delinquency. In most cases, juvenile delinquents are the recipients of less parental love. Cohesive families produce fewer delinquents whereas homes plagued by tension and hostility are fertile breeding grounds for future delinquents.

Today, crime prevention and control are considered truly participative with the total involvement of the community. The risk of crime is alleviated by the creation of a community which is not inclusive of the diversity of families and youth, and which does not provide meaningful social pathways for its members. There is clear evidence that early intervention programmes which address the social and familial context can have a significant impact on crime. Programmes such as quality pre-school education, poverty alleviation and the provision of concrete services, like adequate housing, are successful inclusionary strategies which promote the attachment of individuals and communities to mainstream social support and developmental institutions. This community-building strategy has gained legitimacy in countries like the United States of America, the United Kingdom, Japan and Canada. At the same time, Finland, Cyprus, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland and many other countries have made it obligatory for the public to participate in crime and violence prevention.

West Bengal Initiative

Jolted by the rising graph of crime and violence among school children, the student community in a town in West Bengal has formed an organisation to tackle the problem. The students from both primary and high schools in Krishnagar, Nadia, have already formed an organisation on the basis of the ‘student-parent-teacher-police-collaboration.’ The organisation regularly organises processions and public meetings against crime, violence, smoking and drug addiction among school children. It has formed a core committee named ‘crisis intervention’ and is also engaged in counselling to prevent frustrated examinees from committing suicides or taking recourse to violent options. This effort has drawn has drawn an overwhelming response from all levels of the society. The student community in other districts is also keen to start such a front to fight the social malaise. Once an area model is developed through community mobilisation, it can be followed throughout the country with constructive efforts by the student community and the people at large.

Investment for Prevention

Rich countries like the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Canada initially did not keep any budget for juvenile justice. They put children delinquents behind bars arguing that it was the last resort. But soon they realised the danger was serious for the societies and started investing to prevent it and found that the measure was more cost-effective than putting children in jails. In 1996, the United Kingdom realised that their ‘money was misspent on youth’. In 1998, it created a Youth Justice Board through a Crime and Disorder Act, and consequently youth offensives were reduced to 10 percent and thus investment for prevention proved to be a much better measure than awarding punishment.3 In India, much service will be done if policies be directed to ensure investments for prevention of juvenile crimes.

By LAWZ BUREAU