美国少年司法状况报告

少年司法是美国法律制度的重要组成部分,有其独立程序和法律理念.自上个世纪六十年代以来,少年法庭受到来自自由主义和保守主义的批评.自由主义认为,少年法庭的法官经常以一种任意的、歧视的、甚至是专制的方式行使着家长式的权威;保守主义则认为少年法庭过于仁慈,尤其是对实施暴力犯罪和反复实施犯罪的违法者.来自两方面的挑战,对美国少年司法制度的改革产生了很大影响,并一直延续到现在.     

西方儿童福利的百年架构

我们都曾经是儿童,我们都希望孩子们幸福,这一直是并将继续是人类最普遍珍视的愿望。在联合国网站上,这句话被置于儿童议题的显著位置。6月总是多姿多彩的,不仅是节气的关系,还有月首的特殊意义——国际儿童节,这个属于所有儿童的日子点亮了6月,也让我们重拾儿童福利的议题。     

美国少年司法的新近发展

作为世界上第一个少年司法制度的诞生地———美国 ,它的少年司法体系的改革令人关注。本文回顾了美国少年司法政策的发展历史 ,并系统地检验了美国少年司法体制 ,总结了美国少年司法的历史 ,阐述了美国少年司法近年来的发展状况 ,这些发展推动了学者们对美国少年司法的深入研究 ,从而为处理青少年偏差行为指明了合理、有效的策略。本文还涉及到意识形态、政治策略和媒体对少年司法的公共政策的影响问题 ,最后探讨了将来美国少年司法领域中可能出现的争议。     

少年司法路径之选择与展望——以台湾地区《少年事件处理法》为借镜

从少年事件处理单独立法、设置独立的少年法院,到设计出整套的少年处遇措施体系,再到发展出具有福利化色彩的少年司法制度,台湾地区的《少年事件处理法》在少年法制建设方面树立了良好的典范。我国应以新刑事诉讼法中未成年人刑事案件特别程序的设立为契机,检视过去少年法制发展的缺失,借鉴台湾地区优秀经验,逐步探索发展出适合我国国情的少年司法制度。     

少年司法规律与检察改革研究

少年司法法律可借用医学术语,分为辨证施治规律、治病救人规律、专科门诊规律、表里兼治规律、反复施治规律和扶正祛邪规律,以达到＂惩前毖后,治病救人＂的目的。当前我国少年司法活动中还存在诸如法律法规不健全、专门的未成年人司法机构未全面建立、犯罪预防及回访帮教工作不到位等不足,检察机关应从观念层面、立法层面、组织机构层面、执法层面等角度全面创新完善未成年人犯罪工作机制。     

追寻少年司法的胎痕——评《超越刑事司法:美国少年司法史纲》

姚建龙博士<超越刑事司法>一书对少年司法的历史和本质进行了详细探究:社会发展延长了人们的少年时期,少年司法得以产生,成人社会控制少年的需要是少年司法起源与变迁的真正动力.同时,该书启迪了现实的少年司法实践,那就是在扬弃中改进少年司法,在设计少年案件与成年人案件分案处理机制、特殊审理机制以及判前判后的帮教等等制度时,需要一种特别的关切.     

追寻少年司法的胎痕

姚建龙博士《超越刑事司法》一书对少年司法的历史和本质进行了详细探究：社会发展延长了人们的少年时期,少年司法得以产生,成人社会控制少年的需要是少年司法起源与变迁的真正动力。同时,该书启迪了现实的少年司法实践,那就是在扬弃中改进少年司法,在设计少年案件与成年人案件分案处理机制、特殊审理机制以及判前判后的帮教等等制度时,需要一种特别的关切。     

国家亲权理论与少年司法——以美国少年司法为中心的研究

国家亲权理论是英美法系国家少年司法制度的基本理论根基,它强调国家对未成年人的积极保护责任,要求超越报应主义观念,遵循"未成年人最大利益原则"来处理少年罪错行为。国家亲权理论对于克服刑事古典学派的弊端,推动少年司法制度的进步发挥了重要的作用。但国家亲权理论在少年司法中的应用容易产生理念与实践之间的落差,如何缩小这种落差是英美国家少年司法改革的重要特征。中国的少年司法政策与国家亲权理论存在一定的类同之处,在今后的少年司法改革中应当注意吸收国家亲权理论与英美国家少年司法整合历程中的经验与教训。     

百年嬗变:美国少年司法之溯源、衍变及展望

少年司法肇始于美国,至今已有110余年的历史。但美国少年司法发展历程并非一帆风顺,先后历经前少年法院时期、少年法院创设与探索期、少年权利时期以及少年司法晚近变革期等四个主要阶段。其间,少年司法政策因实证主义兴起与新刑事古典主义复兴等社会思潮交叉影响不免时常进退辗转,甚至出现少年法院废除论的主张。对美国少年司法与未成年人保护追根溯源及总结,以吸取其改革中的经验与教训,以供构建我国少年司法制度反省、参酌和借鉴实有必要。     

建立少年恢复性司法模式刍议

恢复性司法是一种全新的刑事法治模式,本文试从恢复性司法的内容、特征与价值功能等方面进行考察,并对其理论内核进行评析。在目前恢复性司法在我国的理论研究与实践现状的基础上,提出在少年司法制度中首先探索建立恢复性司法模式。     

From Centre Stage to Spear Carrier: The Repositioning of the English Juvenile Court

The approach of the new millennium poses significant challenges for the way in which the youth justice system in general, and the juvenile (now youth) court in particular, develops in the future. The past one hundred years of the juvenile court in England and Wales have seen its role both flow and ebb. It currently faces further significant repositioning. The author distinguishes four themes which have influenced the marginalisation of the juvenile court: bifurcation, diversion, manageralism and legislation of the court.     

Thoughts on Juvenile Justice Systems and Research

This article updates comments published in this journal in 1994 about the nature of the American juvenile justice system, which laid out reasons that it might not serve as a useful model for other nations. Since that time, the US system has moved further right towards the justice model and away from the welfare model. Individualistic philosophies and political conservatism have combined to produce a more adult-like and punitive juvenile system, applied to increasing numbers of minors and to increasingly younger minors. Successful demonstrations of community absorption or treatment have been too few to balance the rightward direction. European scholars are urged to undertake increased studies in two critical areas: (1) the nature, functions, and comparative differences in their juvenile justice systems, and (2) the nature of local communities and their contributions to patterns of delinquency.     

The Double Paradox of Juvenile Justice

This article considers the history of a century of juvenile justice. Illinois 'invented' the separate 'children's court' in 1899 and this concept was spearheaded in Northern America, Great Britain and continental Europe in the first decades of the new century. However, a century after its foundation the future of the juvenile court is in doubt everywhere in the Western world. Some conclude that there is a cyclical pattern in juvenile justice policies. That proposition is rejected in this article. The proposition of a cyclical pattern also presupposes that there is no real problem at stake in treating juvenile offenders. The main point of this article, however, is that juvenile justice cannot escape trying to solve a very complicated foundational issue. This issue is a double paradox, that is, juvenile justice has to solve two philosophical questions: the justification of punishment and the justification of punishment for non-adults. This diagnosis presents a new conceptual framework for an analysis of the history of juvenile justice.     

Juvenile Courts after 100 Years: Past and Present Orientations

Juvenile institutions were developed in the nineteenth century. In the United States, they prompted an extension of the parens patriae doctrine, which provided a basis for the creation of the juvenile court a century ago. The protective orientation of the court was intended both for juvenile delinquents and children in danger. Important changes have occurred since the 1960s. Procedural guarantees for delinquents and de-institutionalisation of children in danger have created a clear distinction between the two groups. Diversion has introduced an alternative to the court process. Policies aimed at young offenders have moved gradually in the direction of the adult criminal court model. The article presents an overview of this evolution, essentially for North America.     

Juvenile Justice and the 'Shift to the Left'

The notion of 'shift' is used as a symbol for procedure in criminal cases, understood as a sequence of legal interferences by the police, the prosecution and by proceedings in court. If this sequence is symbolised by a horizontal line, the procedural stages move from left to right. But the distribution of competences has recently lost its prior balance, due to 'modern' crime and society: The functions of the judge appear reduced, whereas the range of action of the prosecution has widened; also the police has gained more influence. On the symbolic line of procedural stages this all makes for a 'shift to the left'. This paper deals with the question as to whether juvenile justice is undergoing the same changes. The first answer is 'yes', based on the enlarged diversionary competence of prosecutors and the police. From a different perspective, however, juvenile offending is a 'natural' phenomenon connected with young age, which a priori places juvenile justice on a 'left' position of the imagined line. A plea is made for this juvenile justice to stick to its inherent concern for young offenders individually and not to sacrifice this to collective interests in public order and safety.     

Juvenile Justice in Oregon: Balanced and Restorative Justice in Action

The goals of Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ) are to hold juvenile offenders meaningfully accountable, hear and empower crime victims and engage communities both as stakeholders who have been negatively impacted and as advocates to make things right for the crime victim, offender, and community. This article examines how several Oregon juvenile justice agencies have put BARJ into action over the last 25 years, highlighting specific examples of how several agencies have made this the philosophical underpinning of their work. An overview of the philosophical principles, values, and goals that drive this approach is also discussed.