Should juvenile delinquents be punished?

In contemporary times, much to the alarm of governments and states, there has been an exponential increase in crime rates all over the world. Where in the past the occurrence of a crime in residential areas was quite an occasional event, today it is a common thing for even the average five-year-old. A significant contribution towards this is made by juvenile delinquents – underage criminals. With this arises the question: “Should these youngsters be punished?”

Possibly the greatest argument against such punishment is that these youngsters, being below the legal age, are still children. As a result, they are the responsibility of their parents or guardians. Indeed, a child is not allowed to vote, or to drive before the legal age, being considered not sufficiently rational for these activities. Since a child is not rational enough, surely he or she does not deserve any punishment.

Equally important is the universal belief that no individual is born a criminal. Rather, that individual is transformed into one by the circumstances society shapes for him. Punishing this delinquent, therefore, does not cater to the real problem – that of these societal pressures and circumstances. All it does is ruin the remainder of the criminal’s life at such a young age. These teenagers go through an emotional upheaval in life, experience such trauma that it leads to them doing something wrong. What they really need, surely, is therapy and rehabilitation. Such a policy is being pursued in the Scandinavian countries and as a result, they have some of the most peaceful societies in the world, with the lowest rates of juvenile crimes.

Going to jail, on the other hand, only goes on to introduce these young people to hardened criminals, eventually leading them to join prison gangs and at oft-times desire revenge from society. This leads to a vicious cycle of crime – something detrimental to peace and stability. Also, poor children who steal, for example, out of necessity should be cared for, not sent to jail.

Conversely, however, it is also true to say that these young people are not just small children who knew no better. At sixteen or seventeen years of age, they are sensible and rational enough to make mature choices, such as where to go for college studies. They have also been taught at both home and school about laws and the need to adhere to them. Disregarding all these things, however, they still made an active choice to commit such a crime, and then carried it out. Both the intent and act exist despite their being fully aware of the consequences.

Similarly, many of these crimes are serious offences such as kidnapping, rape, murder, or especially in the US, mass shootings. Surely, the families of these victims do deserve to see some kind of retribution for the harms inflicted upon them. In fact, retribution is one of the most important pillars of the criminal justice system. Also, by punishing or sending these youngsters to prison, another important pillar of the justice system – deterrence – is also actively upheld. Indeed, it is the duty of the legal system to live up to these principles.

On the whole, whilst it is true that these youngsters are criminals and need to be punished, there should be varying levels of punishment. Fines and warnings will suffice for minor crimes, but prison is necessary for serious offences.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 14^th, 2020.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.