An Approach to Punishing Juvenile Offenders

Abstract

Background and Aims: The current situation indicates a rising number of crimes committed by juveniles, which in many instances are violent offenses such as rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and homicide. This issue is framed by Thailand's Penal Code, wherein Section 73 stipulates that a child not over twelve years of age who commits an act defined by law as an offense is exempt from punishment. Similarly, Section 74 provides that a child over twelve but not exceeding fifteen years of age is not subject to criminal penalties; instead, the court is empowered to apply alternative measures specifically designed for juveniles. These legal provisions have given rise to significant social concerns. There is a fear that the impunity granted to young offenders may encourage imitative or "copycat" criminal behavior. Furthermore, victims and their families perceive a lack of protection from the state, feeling that these measures are disproportionate to the harm they have suffered and fail to provide a sense of justice.

Methodology: This academic article employs a documentary research methodology, examining literature concerning the concepts of punishment and legal measures for juvenile offenders. The study undertakes a comparative legal analysis of Thai law alongside the laws of several foreign jurisdictions, namely the United States of America, Canada, the French Republic, the People's Republic of China, and the Republic of Korea (South Korea). The data gathered from these sources will be analyzed to propose suitable guidelines for the punishment of juvenile offenders in Thailand.

Results: In Thailand, the punitive measures for offenders aged over twelve but not exceeding fifteen are largely ineffective as a deterrent against imitative criminal behavior among juveniles. Concurrently, victims perceive these measures as inadequate, feeling unprotected by a state that enforces responses disproportionate to the harm they have suffered. In contrast, the approaches in Canada, the French Republic, the People's Republic of China, and the Republic of Korea (South Korea) attempt to align with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. This is demonstrated by their adherence to recommendations against imposing criminal penalties on individuals under twelve and by establishing special measures for persons under eighteen, distinct from the adult justice system. Meanwhile, the United States exhibits significant jurisdictional variance, with the age of criminal responsibility differing from state to state. Ultimately, the nations studied offer suitable measures for the supervision and control of juvenile offenders that could be appropriately adapted for implementation in Thailand.

Conclusion: Among the jurisdictions studied, the rehabilitative and restorative framework utilized by the Juvenile and Family Courts of the Republic of Korea presents the most suitable model for adaptation in Thailand. These measures, which prioritize the rehabilitation of the offender and restoration of harm over purely punitive sanctions, offer a promising approach to reforming Thailand's juvenile justice system.