ABSTRACT

Many jurisdictions respond to the suspected lawbreaking of young people and adults through separate criminal justice systems. These responses are based on the assumption that a ‘just’ response to young people should demand recognition of their developmental needs, accredit them with less moral responsibility than adults and act towards them in ways designed to protect their well-being and welfare. The argument of this chapter is that prioritisation of age difference locks youth justice debates into recurring and circular disagreements about justice, welfare and rights. The chapter’s two main conclusions are: that instead of prioritising age difference, explanations of youth crime should be sought in the social circumstances and cultural contexts that shape both adult and youthful lawbreaking; that community courts should be developed to make effective interventions based on local circumstances, needs and resources.