Abolishment of Doli Incapax Principle and Its Impact on Youth

The report discusses the abolishment of Doli Incapax principle and its impact on youth. It analyzes the background, research, and analysis of the issue. The report recommends suggestions to the NSW government, such as providing proper education regarding crime and opening juvenile justice camps.

Doli Incapax

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3
Background..................................................................................................................................3
Research and Analysis.................................................................................................................4
Recommendation.........................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION
The present report will discuss about abolishment of Doli Incapax principle and the way it
impacts on youth. Along with this, it will also throw light on how the abolishment will be in the
favour of minor child and safeguarding them from illegal detention. Lastly, the study will
recommend the best suggestion to NSW government.
MAIN BODY
Background
In 1998 the government abolished the principle of Doli Incapax and it was presumed in
law that children aged under 14 did know the difference between right and wrong as well as it
was not capable of committing any offence (Pillay, 2019). Along with this, this law can be
rebutted for children between age 10 to 14 if court is satisfied that child knew what it was doing
is wrong and come under definition of naughty or mischievous.
However, change in the law stated that children over the age of 9 can be arrested taken to police
station interviewed and charge with offences. It can be taken to the court and charged with
crimes that will be further recorded.
In case of R vs JTB 2009 UKHL 20 the abolishment of principle Doli Incapax has been
discussed. On April 29, 2009 House of Lords, Lord Philips, Rodger and Carswell has abolished
section 34 of the crime and disorder act 1998 for children age 10 or over. Peter Blair QC and
Kerry Barker for the defendant and Gareth Patterson and David Perry QC for the Crown. In
October, 2007 the defendant pleaded guilty to twelve counts of causing or inciting a child under
13 to engage in sexual activity (CRIMINAL LAW—SEXUAL OFFENCES—WHETHER
DEFENCE OF DOLI INCAPAX ABOLISHED., 2022). Although at time of activity defendant
was 12 years of age and at time of interview it has admitted the activity but was not aware of
what it was doing and have no knowledge regarding right and wrong. Thus it was Doli Incapax
and has sought ruling from trial judge that defence was on its sites. It was later ruled by judge as
defendant entered guilty peals and appealed to court of appeal on the ground that judgement was
wrong. Section 34 of CDA 1998 provided that the presumption of child was doli incapax and it
was aged 10. In concluding the judgement of the court of Appeal said that the question of section
34 had abolished defence of doli incapax.

Age of 9 is one of the youngest age of conducting criminal activity in Europe and UN
committee also considered as condemned and held not to accept it internationally as it harms
right of children.
Moreover, case like Jamie Bulger was major influencer for government on the issue
related to the age of criminality (Lynch, 2018). There was killing of 2-year-old Jamie bulger by
two 10 years old boys and both were vilified in the British Press. In this case Doli incapax had
not been abolished but the boys were deemed that it knows about right and wrong and were
therefore prosecuted. Along with this, it was punished with imprisonment of 15 years a minimum
period in custody to be served. The questioned arise in this case was were the children treated
fairly by law and does it made society safer.
Research and Analysis
Neuroscience has defined pre frontal cortex which allow a person to do activities like
planning and decision making and it is only fully developed in adult and due to that they are able
to take right decision. However, it is not fully grown in children and due to that it cannot make
difference between right and wrong. Along with this, child that have face criminal activity or has
been charged with such punishment are more likely to suffer from disability as compare to other.
(Hampson, 2018). Thus, in case of Bulger case psychiatrist said that child was less mature at the
time of murder even if it was above the age of 10 years. Due to leniencies there were rising case
in crime in youth sector and there is no safety for there wellbeing.
In many constitutions of various country and UK there has been right to fair hearing given
to the parties of the case and it has been included in Human Right Act. If the constitution has
such power than it should give fair legal proceeding to the victims so that accurate decision can
be taken out in the case. Moreover, in case of Venable and Thompson itself demonstrated how
hard it is for minor child to understand and deal with the procedure of court as there mainly use
of legal jargon and foreign process. In this case the child was not able to instruct it legal
representative and due to that there was delay in trial and it was not able to participate in process
of court. Thus, it can be sate that children do not have ability to make difference between what is
right and wrong so this law should be abolished as it will be hard for a minor child to suffer from
long detention period.
Although caution practice and criminal conviction or seriously impact a young person
chances to have successful career in future. Crime like robbery and arson can haunt child and

hinder the employment life later. It will also impact psychologically and make it difficult for
minor to engage with education, employment and training as well as it will be hard for them to
escape criminality (Brow and Charles, 2021 Although children that have been charged with
criminal record have low confidence and it do not able to apply for low skilled job as in
interview they have to face embarrassment due to reveal of record. In short criminalisation effect
society due to chronic unemployment and it also create unsafe environment for them.
Moreover, it has been found that children at young are groomed into doing offence like
drug dealing by adults. The court should focus on the right of the child and work according to
there interest as well as prevent them from offending.
Recommendation
 It is to be suggested that children should be given proper education regarding crime and
the way to prevent from it as it will help in reducing the case of crime like sexual and
physical abuse (Adewum and Adenekan, 2020). Although it should be necessary to give
knowledge regarding criminal justice to young people as its impact the ability of children.
Proper education at school level regarding crime will slower the rate of criminality.
 Moreover, it is to be suggested that criminal below 18should be given appropriate support
and no record should be made in order to protect their career. However, if there is no
criminal record then children will be able to get appropriate job in future.
 Juvenile justice camp should be opened so that in case of heinous crime a child should be
given proper counselling.
CONCLUSION
From the above report it has been concluded that abolishing this rule will be beneficial for
children as it will be able to get employment and develop their career. Although a child below
age of 10 do not have an ability to differentiate right and wrong so giving them detention will be
against human right.

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Adewumi, A. A. and Adenekan, V. O., 2020. Towards a Legislative Reform of the Doctrine of
Doli Incapax under the Nigerian Criminal Code Act. JL Pol'y & Globalization. 95. p.32.
Brown, A. and Charles, A., 2021. The minimum age of criminal responsibility: the need for a
holistic approach. Youth justice. 21(2). pp.153-171.
Hampson, K. S., 2018. Desistance approaches in youth justice–The next passing fad or a sea-
change for the positive?. Youth justice. 18(1). pp.18-33.
Lynch, N., 2018. The Age of Culpability: Children and the Nature of Criminal Responsibility,
written by Gideon Yaffe. The International Journal of Children's Rights. 26(4). pp.841-
842.
Pillay, A. L., 2019. The minimum age of criminal responsibility, international variation, and the
dual systems model in neurodevelopment. Journal of child & adolescent mental
health. 31(3). pp.224-234.
Online references
CRIMINAL LAW—SEXUAL OFFENCES—WHETHER DEFENCE OF DOLI INCAPAX
ABOLISHED., 2022. [Online]. Available through < newlawjournal.co.uk/content/law-reports-75
>
1