Submitted by crinadmin on
Summary: Article arguing that lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility will not increase security. What is necessary is to improve existing children's institutions.
[12 January 2012] - Faced with situations of extreme violence and crime, often involving young people, Brazil’s National Congress is again debating whether to lower the age of criminal responsibility from 18 to 16 years as one of the solutions to the problem. This is despite the fact that the vast majority of offenders are young people between the ages of 19 and 25, as well as other adults. It must also be remembered that behind the adolescent offender, there are always adults. At the centre of violent crime are adult-led organisations, which the police has so far been unable to bring down due to weak investigations and incompetence in the gathering of information, as well as for maintaining the mistaken concept of "the war against crime", despite widespread impunity. Lowering the minimum age of criminal responsibility will have no effect in increasing security among citizens. If Brazil's young offenders institutions do not educate or rehabilitate inmates, then they are not respecting children's rights, as they are merely prisons disguised only by their name. And to lock them up in adult prisons is to condemn them to torture, sexual violence and solitude. Public policies addressing the enormous needs of these institutions are complex, costly and take time, as well as having no electoral appeal. In response to the justified demands of the people, who are frightened because of the rise in criminality, the authorities’ proposal is usually to put more young people in prison. But it is high time that we move beyond the current debate concerning the arbitrary setting of a minimum age at which a person can be held criminally liable for breaking criminal law. We need to start separating the concept of "responsibility" from "criminalisation”, and stop criminalising children. The element of retribution in a sentence, in the form of punishment administered according to the severity of the offence, is completely inappropriate in juvenile justice systems if the aim is the reintegration of young offenders between the ages of 16 and 18 back into society. But until we reach that stage, efforts by the democratic state should not be to pour more adolescents into the criminal justice system -as the bill to lower the minimum age proposes- especially Afro-descendants and those from poor backgrounds. Rather, efforts should aim to improve existing young offenders institutions in order to prevent young people, once they turn into adults, from entering the system. International law makes it absolutely clear that the age of majority is reached at the age of 18, and that any person under the age of 18 who has breached penal law or who has been charged with having done so, should be treated according to the justice norms applicable to children and adolescents. During the past two governments, Brazil has not faced criticism in the international community for wanting to amend its Constitution to be able to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility, as the proposal was not adopted. This clear defence of children's rights during the past 16 years is thanks to former presidents Fernando Henrique Cardoso and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Both made solemn declarations that they would veto any proposal to lower the minimum age of criminal responsibility. Brazilian children, adults and families who have the right to security, and civil rights defenders and the international community all have the firm hope that the current government will take and consolidate the same position as that of the two previous governments. Further Information: