The first regards the age at which a young person is deemed to bear full criminal responsibility for his actions. The Criminal Procedure Code provides that a person who is below 18 years old when the capital offence was committed will not be sentenced to hang but is detained indefinitely at the President's pleasure. The rationale is that the young person may have committed his act in youthful folly and his chances of rehabilitation are strong.

On the other hand, under the Children and Young Persons Act, the special procedures and orders of the Juvenile Court are available to offenders only when they are under 16 at the start of the hearing of the charge against them. The relevant age is therefore ascertained when the young person is taken to court rather than when the offence was committed. This is unfair because it may not be the young person's 'fault' that the case could not be heard by the Juvenile Court earlier, for example, a delay could be caused by the police, prosecutors or the court. A young person who is under 16 when the offence was committed but is taken to court only when he is over 16 will have his case heard by the adult courts. The determination of the relevant age when the offence was committed is more in accordance with our aims of compassion and rehabilitation.

The second matter concerns the age limit for the Juvenile Court's jurisdiction. The norm set by international law under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child stipulates that a child is generally defined as a person under the age of 18. Such persons are to be treated differently under the court system in recognition that, unlike adult offenders where retribution and deterrence may be overriding aims, the best interests of the child come first. It is time for Parliament to consider raising the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court to offenders under 18 instead of under 16, and granting greater protections to this group. If this had been the case now, Nasir's identity would have been kept secret and he would have a better chance of reintegrating into society after his release.

The final point relates to the conflict between sentencing options under the Children and Young Persons Act and the Criminal Procedure Code. Under the former law, a young person who commits murder gets a definite sentence of imprisonment but the latter law requires such a person to be detained indefinitely at the President's pleasure. A defined term of imprisonment offers more hope to young persons and therefore assists in rehabilitation better. Parliament should review sentencing options and abolish detention at the President's pleasure.

Chan Wing Cheong