Child courts to pass sentence on their peers

SCHOOLCHILDREN who commit minor crimes such as vandalism will be sentenced by fellow youngsters under a controversial plan to set up Scotland's first 'kiddy court'.

Children as young as 11 will form a jury, listen to the facts of the case, and hand down a sentence, which could include making good criminal damage.

The scheme – which has been branded "crackpot" by a former High Court judge – is close to being approved by officials at Scottish Borders Council.

They believe youngsters who are sentenced by their peers – rather than formally warned by a police officer – are more likely to avoid trouble in the future.

The children's court is closely modelled on successful schemes in the United States, which are generally regarded as more successful in cutting youth crime than traditional methods.

The range of crimes likely to be dealt with by the 'kiddy court' includes graffiti, vandalism and breaches of the peace, including those which involve bullying.

An estimated 37,000 crimes and offences are committed in Scotland each year by children under the age of 16. According to the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration, vandalism is getting worse among under-16s.

In 2003–04, there were 9,392 referrals but by 2006–07 the figure had risen 41% to 13,212. For fire-raising the figure went from 728 to 1,089.

In the Scottish Borders, the plan for youth panels would involve a young offender who had already admitted their guilt to police but whose offence would not be serious enough to merit appearing before a Children's Panel. Such cases are currently dealt with by a police inspector or chief superintendent giving the youth a warning. Possible punishments would include:

&149 Repairing damage or cleaning up graffiti;

&149 Writing letters of apology;

&149 Saying sorry in person and listening to the victim explain the impact of the crime on them;

&149 Attending courses which might deal with offending behaviour.

The plan is based on a scheme which has run for more than a decade in New York City, where youngsters from the age of 14 sit in judgment on each other.

The scheme gives jury members 10 weeks of training and swears them to secrecy. It also selects jurors from schoolchildren of various backgrounds and academic levels as well as former offenders to avoid accusations of class bias.

The scheme avoids restricting courts to individual schools to reduce the chances of the accused and jurors knowing each other. The Scottish version will see those on the panels given support and advice by adults in the council's youth justice team. The local Children's Reporter will advise on appropriate cases for the youth panels.

Planners in the Borders have still not decided which areas will pilot it or exactly what ages will sit on the panels.

Jeremy Purvis, the Lib Dem MSP for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale, said: "These youth panels will give an opportunity to nip offending behaviour in the bud. It won't be appropriate for everyone, but there will be a significant number who will listen to their peers rather than some person in a suit. The disapproval of their peers confronts offenders in a way that a lecture from a much older person doesn't."

The scheme has had mixed reactions from legal and justice experts. Criminal defence and human rights lawyer John Scott said: "It sounds like something worth trying. Sometimes young people can get through to young offenders in a way that judges, lawyers and social workers can't."

Iona Stevenson, a 17-year-old pupil at Earlston High School and a member of the Scottish Youth Parliament, said: "I think this is a really good idea. It will benefit the offender by having their behaviour scrutinised by other young people."

However, former High Court judge Lord McCluskey, said: "This seems to me to be a completely crackpot idea drawn up on the back of an envelope, especially when you compare it to the years of debate which went into 1968 Social Work Act which gave us the Children's Panel system. It's not always appropriate to bring in ideas from the United States; they have a very different situation from us."