The Queensland Government has recently passed landmark but controversial youth crime laws, with hopes of combatting the increasing prevalence of youth crime across the state. The new legislation, tag lined as “adult crime, adult time” have delivered several reforms including the removal of detention as a last resort for young offenders, allowing courts to consider a youth offender’s full criminal history, implementing victim-focused sentencing and opening the children’s court to victims, their families and the media. Most significantly, the changes now mean youth offenders will face adult sentences for committing 13 of the most serious offences including murder, manslaughter, robbery, grievous bodily harm, serious assault and dangerous operation of a vehicle.
Similarly, the South Australian government is currently considering raising the minimum age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 12, following a seemingly dramatic increase in youth crime rates, particularly within Adelaide.
Youth crime and the juvenile justice system have been at the forefront of Australian headlines and politics for the past 5 years, stemming from a long-standing national debate as to what age children should be held criminally responsible and questioning the efficacy of existing legislation in reducing youth crime and overall protecting the safety of the community.
While some believe legislative reform is an integral first step in combatting youth crime, critics of the LNP’s decision argue the changes are too punitive and fail to address the underlying causes of youth crime. They argue The Making Queensland Safer laws will lead to further detention of children, for longer periods of time, which will undoubtedly result in more harm and ultimately put the community’s safety at future risk. The United Nations also expressed their opposition to the new laws, highlighting that they will be a “flagrant disregard for children’s rights under international law.”
Others have called for governmental focus to be placed on other parts of the policy such as early intervention and diversion, arguing that preventative measures and interventions to redirect children away from crime, as well as rehabilitative programs to reduce reoffending, will have far more successful social and economic outcomes.
The question now is what’s next? Will other states follow in Queensland’s footsteps and what effect will these new laws have? How will the government handle the likely influx of detained children? When will they address the underfunding of community legal centres or organizations who could be having a direct impact on the reduction of youth crime?
It is evident the age of criminal responsibility and youth crime are complex and controversial matters, that will likely be relevant within the upcoming years. It seems only time will truly tell how the justice system and Australia as a nation are to move forward.