Juvenile courts : problems and dilemmas
| dc.contributor.advisor | Potgieter, P.J. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Pienaar, Petrus Jacob Johannes. | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-02-08T08:09:11Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2013-02-08T08:09:11Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 1993 | |
| dc.description | Submitted to the Faculty of Arts in fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree Mater of Arts in the Department of Criminal Justice at the University of Zululand, South Africa, 1993. | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | This investigation examined certain problems and dilemmas in the juvenile court. Three problem areas were included: The accusatorial - inquisitorial view as the main approach in the juvenile justice system. The rehabilitative - retributive approach and its application to juvenile offenders. (Magistrates' sentencing objectives and their application to juvenile offenders. The possibility of the application of the pre-trial judicial investigation in the juvenile court. In addition, a number of items were simultaneously included in the investigation and, where applicable, are included in this report The research questionnaires were delivered by hand to a number of magistrates in the Eastern Cape, Orange Free State and Transvaal. After a few weeks the questionnaires were collected and unstructured interviews were conducted with some of the magistrates. A total of 39 questionnaires were collected and use was made of the descriptive statistical technique to summarize and condense the data to measurable units. Because of the explorative-descriptive nature of the investigation the results can only be generalized to Eastern Cape, Orange Free State and Transvaal The following are the more significant findings: 1. Adjudication of Juvenile Offenders • 10,3% of magistrates accepted the accusatorial, 25,6% the inquisitorial, 33,3% the accusatorial - inquisitorial, and 30,8% the inquisitorial - accusatorial approaches. • 82,1% of magistrates agreed that in no country would one find a system which is purely accusatorial or inquisitorial. • a substantial record of previous convictions is to 74,4% of magistrates on aggravating circumstances. • The majority 89,7% of magistrates would feel justified in making allowance for mitigating circumstances if they had a particular sentencing objective in mind. • 89,7% of magistrates would regard mitigating circumstances as a juvenile's right to have sentence reduced. 2. Sentencing of Juvenile Offenders • 74,3% of magistrates rated reformation as a sentencing objective for juvenile offenders, as Very important'. • 743% of magistrates rated the need to expose the juvenile offender to treatment • 64,1% of magistrates rated the sentencing principle of protecting society from juvenile crime and helping the juvenile offender's development as complementary. • The most important factor which influences magistrates in reaching a sentence of community service is where the offender will benefit, 84,6%. • 61,5% of magistrates kept punishment in mind for assault on police. The results demonstrate that the rehabilitative - treatment objective and the retributive - punishment objective are the main objectives of sentencing in the juvenile court. 3. Pre-trial judicial investigation in juvenile courts • Approximately 74,4% of magistrates were in favour of pre-trial judicial investigation. • 71,8% of magistrates agreed that probation officers, and 71,8% agreed that criminologists can be helpful in the juvenile court. • Finally, one can accept that the majority of magistrates in this investigation support the implementation of a pre-trial judicial investigation in the juvenile justice system. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10530/1145 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | University of Zululand | en_US |
| dc.subject | Juvenile courts | en_US |
| dc.title | Juvenile courts : problems and dilemmas | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |