The case against retribution

Before the amendments to the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 were passed in the end of 2015, India saw pitched battles over whether the law should be amended to treat juveniles, between the age of 16 to

Published: 27th December 2017 04:00 AM  |   Last Updated: 27th December 2017 03:21 AM   |  A+A-

Before the amendments to the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000 were passed in the end of 2015, India saw pitched battles over whether the law should be amended to treat juveniles, between the age of 16 to 18, who had committed “heinous” offences as adult offenders. The Ryan International School murder may be the first high-profile case since the law was amended.

The Juvenile Justice Board made this decision recently on the basis of social and psychological profiles of the accused. This means that the accused, if convicted, will serve out his term at a correctional home till he is 21 before being moved to an adult prison. The amended Act still does not permit such offenders to be given a life term or a death sentence.

While it may be fair to say that a 16-year-old knows right from wrong, experts have long pointed out that the brain is not fully formed till one hits their early 20s. This suggests that young offenders can be reformed in ways that adults cannot. For that, however, reformation—not retribution—needs to be the central doctrine of our justice system. The Ryan International murder investigation was originally botched. A bus conductor at the school was accused of the crime before being cleared. But by then, he had been tried and convicted by the media and public opinion. His is only the most recent instance of a life ruined by a botched investigation.

A study conducted by interviewing 60 former Supreme Court judges showed they believed investigations were regularly manipulated and torture employed by investigating agencies. This should make us balk at retributive justice, as it could easily be deployed against the innocent. Most judges interviewed, however, did not let this affect their view of the death penalty.

Is this the justice system under which we should be placing young offenders? The Juvenile Justice Act is meant to look at juvenile offenders as capable of change. Trying juveniles as adults—even if they are guilty of the crime—only says that we, as a society, have given up on them without even trying.

Stay up to date on all the latest Editorials news with The New Indian Express App. Download now
(Get the news that matters from New Indian Express on WhatsApp. Click this link and hit 'Click to Subscribe'. Follow the instructions after that.)

Comments

Disclaimer : We respect your thoughts and views! But we need to be judicious while moderating your comments. All the comments will be moderated by the newindianexpress.com editorial. Abstain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks. Try to avoid outside hyperlinks inside the comment. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines.

The views expressed in comments published on newindianexpress.com are those of the comment writers alone. They do not represent the views or opinions of newindianexpress.com or its staff, nor do they represent the views or opinions of The New Indian Express Group, or any entity of, or affiliated with, The New Indian Express Group. newindianexpress.com reserves the right to take any or all comments down at any time.

facebook twitter whatsapp