Juvenile Delinquency in the Modern World: Legal Challenges, Reformative Justice and Evolving Perspectives (Nepal, India and South Asian Perspectives)

No person is inherently born a criminal; rather, societal influences, environmental factors, and individual choices shape one's path toward delinquent behavior. The perception that crimes of lesser gravity can be excused is prevalent among people, and while in certain instances, this may hold some truth, it cannot be regarded as a universal principle to be followed. Crime, regardless of its severity, remains an offense against both the government and society. The recognition of this fact led to the evolution of legal frameworks over time, particularly concerning juvenile offenders. It was not until the 19th century that legal systems worldwide began distinguishing between crimes committed by adults and those committed by minors. Before this, both were judged under the same legal standards, leading to unjust consequences for juvenile offenders who lacked the cognitive maturity to fully comprehend their actions. Juvenile delinquency is a multifaceted issue that has been widely debated. While some argue that treating juveniles as criminals is a violation of human rights, others believe that ensuring accountability is necessary for equity and justice. The modern world recognizes the significance of juvenile justice systems, as they provide a structured approach to handling offenses committed by minors. Legal systems across different jurisdictions vary in their treatment of juvenile offenders, but a universally accepted principle is that children who have not yet attained the age of majority should not be punished in the same manner as adults. While it may seem inhumane to treat a juvenile as a criminal, complete leniency can also lead to increased delinquency and embolden young offenders to commit more serious crimes. Therefore, striking a balance between punishment and rehabilitation is essential.

The determination of culpability in juvenile cases requires scrutiny, as the justification for either punishment or acquittal depends on the level of maturity possessed by the minor. This assessment can be inferred from the juvenile’s actions before and after committing an offense. According to well-established principles of natural justice, every individual is entitled to a fair trial and the right to be heard. Convicting a juvenile without considering their maturity level would be a violation of these principles, just as acquitting a minor solely due to their young age would be an injustice. A careful, evidence-based approach is necessary to ensure that juvenile justice is fair, just and effective in preventing recidivism. In recent years, the global landscape of juvenile delinquency has evolved, presenting new challenges and complexities. Factors such as technological advancements, shifting social dynamics, and increased awareness of mental health issues have contributed to changes in the nature and perception of juvenile offenses. Consequently, there is a pressing need to re-evaluate existing juvenile justice systems to ensure they are equipped to address these modern challenges effectively. This includes integrating contemporary rehabilitation methods, enhancing support systems, and fostering community involvement to prevent delinquency and facilitate the reintegration of young offenders into society.

This study aims to analyze how different nations approach juvenile justice, examining the foundations, principles, and legal procedures involved in juvenile justice systems across various jurisdictions. By evaluating existing frameworks, we can gain insights into the effectiveness of different policies and explore ways to enhance the balance between rehabilitation and accountability in juvenile justice. This paper will delve into the core principles guiding juvenile justice, the legal safeguards in place for minors and the evolving perspectives on juvenile crime prevention and reform.