Children in Sierra Leone suffered immeasurably during the armed conflict that engulfed the country from 1991 to 2002. They were forced into assuming ‘dual identities’’ of both victim and perpetrator. Children witnessed the perpetration of violations during the armed conflict and, in turn, perpetrated appalling human rights violations against others. Consequently, the end of the war in Sierra Leone saw the prevalence of orphaned, abandoned, unaccompanied and separated children, which has resulted in the dramatic rise in the number of street children in the country. Thousands more live with their families but spend a large portion of their time on the streets. Life on the streets has led to children being engaged in other forms of destructive hehaviour, such as drug abuse, prostitution, criminal activity and confrontation with law enforcement officials.
In Sierra Leone, the laws relating to the definition of a child are significantly inconsistent. There is no uniform age of majority throughout the country. According to Cap 31 ( Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act) of the Laws of Sierra Leone 1960, for example, a child is defined as being ‘a person under the age of sixteen years’. The ordinance which Regulate the infliction of corporal punishment defines a child as aged 15 years or below.’ “Child’’ any ‘young person’’ or ‘a person who is fourteen years of age or upwards and under the age of seventeen years’’. Notwithstanding the distinction, the minimum age of criminal responsibility for juvenile offenders in Sierra Leon is, according to common law, ten years. According to the ‘‘Beijing Rules’’, juvenile is defined as ‘a child or young person who, under the respective legal systems, may be dealt with for an offence in a manner which is different from an adult.’ There is no age criterion contained here. The Child Rights Acts 2007 however, defines a child as being ‘every human being below the age of eighteen years unless, under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.’ The Beijing Rules nonetheless provides that states should establish ‘a minimum age below which children shall be presumed not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law.’ In line with this, the Beijing Rules provide that the minimum age of criminal responsibility ‘shall not be fixed to age level, bearing in mind the facts of emotional, mental and intellectual maturity’ of the offender.
Juvenile justice from a common perspective is essentially associated with children and young persons in conflict with the law. That is to say, it touches on the way and manner in which justice is rendered to juvenile offenders, considering the weight of their unlawful conduct and their special circumstances. International standards use the terms ‘juvenile justice systems’’ to refer to the treatment of the children accused or convicted for breaching the law, whether in justice systems specifically for children or in justice systems that deal with adults as well.
When a juvenile offender, after understanding the content of the charges brought against him/her, enters a plea of ‘guilty’; or, where the court is satisfied that the offence has satisfactorily been established, section 24 of Cap 44 of the Laws of Sierra Leone 1960 indicates that the penalty of imprisonment does not apply if he is below 14 years of age. And, to those between 14 to 17 years of age, it applies only when other methods of dealing with the offender are manifestly inadequate.
This provision in Cap 44 is flagrantly being abused in Eastern Sierra Leone. Juvenile offenders are often imprisoned not after having exhausted all other possibilities. To make matter worse, they are most times held in maximum security prisons and police detention centers with adult convicts as there are no Remand Homes and Approved Schools for child offenders. Moreover, the probation officers who are charged with the responsibility of safeguarding and promoting the welfare of juvenile offenders against abuse and neglect are somewhat disinterested or unwilling to follow up on such matters.
In trying juvenile offenders within the limits of Chapter 44 and other related laws, it is expected that the basic consideration of the courts shall be to protect, preserve, and promote the rights of the juvenile offenders in relation to the charges against them and based on their personal circumstances. Worthy of note is that ‘juvenile justice shall be conceived as an integral part of the national development process of each country within the comprehensive framework of social justice for all juveniles’.
Rules 5/17 of The Beijing Rules state that the juvenile justice system must emphasize the wellbeing of the juvenile and ensure that any reaction to juvenile offenders is always in proportion to the circumstances of both the offender and the offence. Article 40(1) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) says that states should recognize the rights of every child accused of a criminal offence to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child’s sense of dignity and worth, taking into account the child’s age and the desirability of promoting the child’s reintegration and assumption of a constructive role in society. Chapter 44 of The Laws of Sierra Leone 1960 expressly states what the Magistrate Courts adjudicating juvenile-related matters should do. When a child or young person is in conflict with the law, the Act provides for such offender to be place under the care of a probation officer as a first step. Where this is not possible, the offender is then sent to a Remand Home, except where the offender holds himself out to be of bad behavior during trial.
However, the absence of Approved Schools and Remand Homes in all the three districts of Eastern Sierra Leone has greatly affected the proper and effective administration of juvenile justice there. When the court in Kenema, after hearing juvenile cases, acts in conformity with Article 14(4) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) by handing over offenders to the Probation Officer because of the lack of Remand Homes in entire region, the officers take the children to the police station and keep them in usually very insanitary police cells. The fact that these kids are made to share the same cells with adults certainly increases the possibility of recidivism.
International standards set out some guiding principles relating to juvenile justice. These are found on the duty of the state to secure the best interest of each child and the corresponding duty to ensure that measures affecting children who have broken the law are proportional to the gravity of the offence and take into consideration the personal circumstance of the juvenile.
With the increase in child trafficking, it is important that systems that safeguard the rights of the child are constantly improved upon. We must remember that these children are going to be charged with the responsibility of administering the nation tomorrow. Therefore, a primary consideration in all actions concerning them, including those undertaken by the courts of law, administrative or legislative bodies must be in the best interests of the child.
