News

On the face of it the launch of Scotland’s first youth court this week might be seen as an another example of the country’s progressive approach to tackling youth offending, writes Sally Gillen.

The 16 and 17-year-old persistent offenders it will deal with currently go before an adult court, a system many view as inappropriate and are keen to see scrapped.

One of those who has welcomed the new idea is Susan Devlin, manager of children and families and justice services at North Lanarkshire council, who says a youth court will be more “receptive” than the adult one most 16 and 17-year-olds find themselves in.

Funded with £6 million from the Scottish executive, the youth court, will be piloted for two years in Hamilton, an area served by North and South Lanarkshire councils.

It will be multi-agency based, involving police, social services, the court service, legal aid and the prosecution service, and the councils will share £1.4 million to devise new programmes, including ones focusing on community-based work and restorative justice.

“We hope that the programmes we develop will have an impact on the number of young people that end up with custodial sentences because we will be able to show the court that the young person will be engaged in something.”

Devlin also believes that the creation of remand foster bail, introduced as a result of the youth court money, may keep young people out of a young offenders’ institution because it will allow the them to show that while on remand they have kept out of trouble.

Critics and supporters of the scheme agree that its biggest advantage is the ability to fast track the procedure, which will mean that the young person will appear in court a maximum of 10 days after they have committed a crime.

Now the majority of young offenders wait on average eight months for a court date, during which time the impact of their crime, and their remorse, lessens, says Devlin.

With this system, professionals will be able to intervene more quickly, which will increase their ability to show young offenders the cost of their crime.

But is the youth court the “innovative and effective” answer to youth crime described by minister for justice Cathy Jamieson at its launch? After all it was not so long ago that the abolition of any sort of court procedure for 16 and 17-year-olds looked certain.

In June 2000 a review of youth crime was undertaken by a group of experts, which included social care professionals, and was submitted to the Scottish executive. Its main recommendation was that the children’s hearing system, which is made up of lay people, the young person’s parent or carer, a social worker and a recorder from the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration, should be extended to 16 and 17-year-olds.

But Douglas Hamilton, research and policy officer at Barnardo’s Scotland, says: “For the last two years we have been waiting for pilots extending children’s hearings for 16 and 17-year-olds, which is something that was supported by everyone, social services and voluntary organisations etc. The executive was supposed to be legislating for that, but it was dropped at the last minute. Ok, pilot youth courts but make sure you try extending children’s hearings as well.”

He adds that there is a “big fear” that there will be an increase in the number of custodial sentences once the youth court is established because it is not as “informal and child-friendly” as a children’s hearing, which also takes an approach that attempts to get a “whole picture” of the young person in order to explain their actions and look for solutions.

The disappearance of a pilot for extending the hearings from the Criminal Justice Bill is easily explained, according to Hamilton. “What it comes down to is politicians. During the last elections they were all were campaigning on the basis of who was going to be hardest on youth crime and the public think that a court sounds harsher than a children’s hearing. But what we are asking is whether it is most effective,” he says.

Certainly the language ministers have chosen to use in relation to youth crime has taken on a punitive tone in recent months. Announcing the establishment of a working group to examine the feasibility of a youth court last August, first minister Jack McConnell talked about youth crime affecting “too many Scots”, and a commitment to “improving the quality of life for our communities”.

On another occasion he “promised tough and effective action against the small number of young people who repeatedly reoffend” - harsh rhetoric designed to appeal to voters.

Worryingly, it seems that Scotland is turning to more punitive measures to deal with youth crime overall. The Anti-Social Behaviour (Scotland) Bill replicates much of the work done in England, which has been attacked by children’s charities, such as tagging anti-social behavior orders for under 16s and parenting orders.