Juvenile Justice Compared To International Standards
I. Introduction
Juvenile justice refers to the system of laws, policies, and practices designed to handle juveniles (typically under 18 years of age) who are accused or convicted of crimes. Afghanistan, as a signatory to international conventions like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), has made commitments to ensure juveniles are treated differently from adults, with a focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment.
However, in practice, Afghanistan's juvenile justice system has faced major challenges, especially in the context of political instability, weak institutions, and traditional social norms.
II. Key International Standards on Juvenile Justice
According to international law (primarily the CRC and UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice – "Beijing Rules"), the key standards are:
Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (MACR): Should not be too low (UN recommends at least 12).
Separation from Adults: Juveniles must be detained separately from adults.
Right to Legal Representation and Fair Trial.
Use of Detention as a Last Resort: Detention must be for the shortest time possible.
Focus on Rehabilitation, not punishment.
Protection from Abuse or Torture in detention.
Right to Education and Health while detained.
III. Afghan Juvenile Justice Legal Framework
1. Juvenile Code of Afghanistan (2005)
This law defines:
A juvenile as a person aged 12 to 18.
Establishes Juvenile Justice Boards, Child Correction Centers, and special procedures.
Encourages diversion programs, education, and counseling.
2. Afghan Penal Code (2017)
Reduces sentences for juveniles.
Sets special sentencing and investigation rules for minors.
3. Constitution of Afghanistan (2004)
Guarantees equal treatment and access to justice under Article 22 and 24.
IV. Case Law – Detailed Examples
Below are six real or representative cases from Afghanistan showing how juvenile justice compares with international standards:
1. Case of Ahmad – Theft by a 14-Year-Old (Kabul, 2017)
Facts:
Ahmad, aged 14, was accused of stealing a mobile phone.
Arrested and held in police custody for 4 days before appearing before a judge.
He did not have a lawyer during questioning.
Legal Analysis:
Violation of international standard requiring immediate access to legal representation.
Holding for 4 days without court appearance violates the CRC, which requires prompt judicial review.
Outcome:
Sent to Juvenile Rehabilitation Center in Kabul.
Received 6-month sentence but participated in vocational training.
Afghan juvenile court applied domestic law but fell short on procedural protections.
2. Case of Zahra – Girl Accused of “Running Away” (Herat, 2018)
Facts:
Zahra, aged 16, fled her abusive home and was arrested for “running away,” treated as a moral crime.
Detained without charge for 3 weeks.
No evidence of a criminal act; only social disapproval.
Legal Analysis:
Detaining a child for status offenses like running away contradicts international standards.
The CRC emphasizes that girls should never be criminalized for such actions.
Outcome:
Released after advocacy by women’s rights groups.
Her case highlighted the gap between customary practices and international norms.
3. Case of Sameer – Convicted of Drug Smuggling (Nangarhar, 2019)
Facts:
Sameer, age 17, was used as a courier for smuggling opium.
Arrested with 2 kg of opium; no legal guardian or lawyer present during trial.
Legal Analysis:
Though the offense was serious, UN CRC requires the court to consider coercion or exploitation.
Afghan courts treated him more like an adult offender.
Outcome:
Sentenced to 3 years in juvenile detention.
Missed opportunity for rehabilitation or protection as a trafficking victim under international standards.
4. Case of Latif – Tried as Adult at Age 16 (Balkh, 2020)
Facts:
Latif was accused of armed robbery at age 16.
Due to lack of birth certificate, he was tried as an adult.
Legal Analysis:
International law emphasizes the presumption of minority if age is uncertain.
Afghanistan's failure to verify age before trial violated the CRC.
Outcome:
Sentenced to 8 years in adult prison.
Contravened Afghan juvenile law and international standards on age determination.
5. Case of Hamida – Girl Detained for “Zina” (Kandahar, 2021)
Facts:
Hamida, age 17, was arrested for alleged pre-marital relationship (Zina).
Detained for 11 months in a juvenile facility without trial.
No DNA evidence or medical examination was provided.
Legal Analysis:
Under international law, consensual sexual activity between adolescents should not be criminalized.
Prolonged pre-trial detention is against CRC Article 37.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to 18 months.
Case revealed clashes between international rights standards and religious/moral codes applied in local courts.
6. Case of Wali – Successful Rehabilitation (Kabul, 2016)
Facts:
Wali, age 15, convicted of petty theft.
Court diverted him to a rehabilitation and vocational training center.
Legal Analysis:
This case aligned closely with Beijing Rules, emphasizing rehabilitation.
Child was assigned a counselor, received training, and rejoined school.
Outcome:
After 9 months, Wali was released and employed in a tailoring shop.
Best practice example of juvenile justice in compliance with international norms.
V. Comparative Analysis – Gaps Between Afghan and International Standards
| Standard | International Law | Afghanistan Practice |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility | At least 12 (CRC recommendation) | 12 (compliant) |
| Separation from Adults in Detention | Mandatory | Often violated in remote provinces |
| Legal Representation | Immediate and guaranteed | Frequently absent in early stages |
| Use of Detention | Last resort, shortest time | Detention often overused |
| Due Process | Full right to fair trial | Often lacks defense counsel, especially for girls |
| Rehabilitation Focus | Emphasized | Uneven implementation |
| Non-Criminalization of Moral Offenses | Protected by CRC | Violated—e.g., “running away” cases |
VI. Conclusion
Afghanistan's juvenile justice system is partially aligned with international standards. It has enacted laws that formally recognize juveniles’ rights and emphasize rehabilitation, such as the Juvenile Code of 2005. However, systemic issues—such as lack of resources, corruption, traditional norms, and inconsistent judicial capacity—have hindered implementation.
Case law reveals both positive efforts (like diversion and rehabilitation centers) and serious concerns (such as detention without trial, moral policing, and trying children as adults). To fully align with international obligations, Afghanistan needs to:
Strengthen age verification mechanisms.
Expand access to juvenile legal aid.
Prohibit detention for status and moral offenses.
Enhance oversight of juvenile detention centers.
RELATED Blog
0 comments