Separate systems of justice for children and young people have always been beset by issues of contradiction and compromise. There is compelling evidence that such ambiguity is currently being 'resolved' by a greater governmental resort to neo-conservative punitive and correctional interventions and a neo-liberal responsibilizing mentality in which the protection historically afforded to children is rapidly dissolving. This resurgent authoritarianism appears all the more anachronistic when it is set against the widely held commitment to act within the guidelines established by various children's rights conventions. Of note is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, frequently described as the most ratifi ed human rights convention in the world, but lamentably also the most violated. Based on international research on juvenile custody rates and children's rights compliance in the USA and Western Europe, this article examines why and to what extent 'American exceptionalism' might be permeating European nation states. 1
After a year of frenetic activity New Labour's Crime and Disorder Act slipped quietly into the statute book on the last day before parliament's summer recess in 1998. Heralded as a radical shake up of criminal justice and youth justice, the major provisions of the Act are examined in this article and its likely impact on the treatment of young people is critically assessed. It does so by tracing how far the rhetoric of crime prevention represents a radical new departure or a continuation of the former government's commitment to penal populism. By unearthing the key foundational elements in Labour's agenda—authoritarianism, communitarianism, remoralization, managerialism—the article notes the significant presences and absences that are likely to be witnessed in youth justice in England and Wales by the turn of the century.
The concept of globalisation has gradually permeated criminology, but more so as applied to transnational organised crime, international terrorism and policing than in addressing processes of criminal justice reform. So how useful is it in understanding contemporary transformations in systems of youth and juvenile justice? Until the 1970s juvenile justice, was dominated by an entrenched series of debates circulating around the often-nebulous opposition of welfare and punishment. Since then neoliberal assaults on the social logics of the welfare state and public provision, particularly in Britain, USA, Canada and Australasia, have brought profound shifts in economic, social and political relations associated with the 'free market'. In their wake have emerged a renewed penalisation of young people and an emphasis on enforcing individual, family and community responsibility. Simultaneously many jurisdictions worldwide have begun to experiment with restorative justice and the prospect of rehabilitation through mediation. Widely ratified international directives, epitomised by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, have also begun to stress the importance of incorporating a rights consciousness into juvenile justice reform. These diverse trajectories in retribution, responsibility, restoration and rights have created a particularly complex contemporary landscape of youth governance. The concept of globalisation draws attention to the impact that these competing transformations have had on processes of policy and legal convergence. Based on a wide range of bibliographic and web resources, this article assesses the extent to which it is now possible to talk of a global juvenile/youth justice or whether persistent national and local divergences, together with the contradictions of contemporary reform, preclude any aspiration for the delivery of a universal and consensual product.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.