How should juvenile offenders and multiple offenders be handled?
Báo Dân trí•23/10/2024
(Dan Tri) - There are many conflicting opinions about the application of penalties to juvenile offenders as well as the separation of criminal cases involving juvenile offenders.
On the morning of October 23, the National Assembly discussed in the hall a number of contents with different opinions of the draft Law on Juvenile Justice (JJJ). This draft law was first commented on at the 7th session of the 15th National Assembly. According to the agenda, the Law on Juvenile Justice is one of 15 laws expected to be considered and approved by the National Assembly at this session. Discussing in groups at the 7th session, there were many conflicting opinions on the application of penalties to juvenile offenders, multiple offenders, and on separating criminal cases with juvenile offenders... Ensuring deterrence but promoting humanity and goodwill Regarding the penalties applied to juvenile offenders, the National Assembly Standing Committee (NASC) said that many opinions agreed with the provisions of the draft law on penalties applied to juvenile offenders, and many opinions suggested continuing to carefully review specific provisions in the four types of penalties to ensure the institutionalization of the requirement for more humane treatment of juvenile offenders. According to the NASC, in addition to fixed-term imprisonment, the draft law continues to inherit the provisions of the Penal Code on three other types of penalties (including warnings, fines, and non-custodial reform) to ensure that they are appropriate to the nature and level of danger of each criminal act. 8th session, 15th National Assembly (Photo: Pham Thang). In response to the opinions of many National Assembly deputies, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly proposed that the National Assembly retain the provisions of the draft law on four types of penalties. At the same time, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly directed a thorough review of the provisions of each type of penalty to ensure both deterrence and crime prevention, and to promote humanity and benevolence in handling juvenile offenders. Regarding the combination of penalties in cases of multiple crimes, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly directed a thorough review and found that the provisions in Article 103 of the current Penal Code on the combination of penalties are unreasonable, leading to a lack of fairness. Article 103 of the 2015 Penal Code (amended and supplemented in 2017) stipulates: "When trying a person under 18 years of age who commits multiple crimes at the same time, the court shall decide on the penalty for each crime and combine the total penalty according to the provisions of Article 55 of the Penal Code. If the total penalty is non-custodial reform, the highest penalty applied shall not exceed 3 years. If the total penalty is fixed-term imprisonment, the highest penalty applied shall not exceed 18 years for a person from 16 years old to under 18 years old when committing the crime and 12 years for a person from 14 years old to under 16 years old when committing the crime". However, according to the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, regarding the total level of general penalties, it is proposed to adjust it to not exceed 12 years in prison for people from 14 to under 16 years old and not exceed 18 years in prison for people from 16 to under 18 years old and apply it uniformly to all crimes. Such a provision ensures differentiation in the handling policy between juvenile offenders who commit one crime and juvenile offenders who commit multiple crimes; does not increase the responsibility for handling compared to the provisions of the Penal Code; overcomes the shortcomings in the provisions of the Penal Code on the total amount of penalties; and does not create new conflicts in the total amount of penalties. The Standing Committee of the National Assembly proposes that the National Assembly allow the adjustment of the provisions on the total amount of penalties as in Clauses 2 and 3, Article 117 of the draft law. Should cases involving minors be separated? Regarding the separation of criminal cases involving juvenile offenders, according to the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, the majority of opinions agree with the draft law that cases involving juvenile offenders must be separated for settlement. The Standing Committee of the National Assembly said that the draft law has added many specialized, friendly and more humane policies and regulations for juveniles, such as the time limit for investigation, prosecution and trial of juveniles not exceeding half of the time limit for adults, except in cases of particularly complicated cases. Or the person conducting the proceedings must meet the condition of having been trained or having experience in investigating, prosecuting and trying cases related to juveniles; stipulating the order, procedures, and specific time limit for considering and deciding to apply community-based diversion measures and educational diversion measures at reform schools for juveniles. In addition, the draft law also has many other specialized policies that only apply to juveniles during the process of resolving criminal cases... To fully implement these humane policies, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of National Defense, the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme People's Procuracy , and the Supreme People's Court all agree to separate cases in cases where the defendants are juveniles and adults. However, regarding the time of separating cases during the investigation phase, the Ministry of Public Security proposes to stipulate when it is deemed that the criminal acts of the juvenile and related circumstances have been clarified; the Supreme People's Court proposes not to specifically stipulate the time of separating cases in the law and should assign the central judiciary to stipulate in detail to cover cases in practice of resolving cases. In response to the opinions of the majority of National Assembly deputies and relevant agencies, the Standing Committee of the National Assembly proposed that the National Assembly retain the provision of the draft law requiring the separation of cases involving juvenile offenders during the investigation phase for resolution, in order to ensure full and effective implementation of the humane, friendly, and progressive policies of the draft law.
Comment (0)