This November marks thirty years since the Netherlands ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). The Convention stipulates that children have the right to protection, development, and participation in all matters affecting them. How well is the Netherlands living up to those principles within its juvenile justice system, three decades on? Jolande uit Beijerse, Professor of Judicial Youth Interventions at Erasmus School of Law, reflects in this article on the past and future of children’s rights and juvenile justice.
Initially little attention
When the Netherlands formally endorsed the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1995, it did not immediately lead to changes in the juvenile justice system. Uit Beijerse recalls that the opposite almost seemed true: “At first, the Dutch legislator appeared to pay little attention to the Convention, because in the very year the UNCRC was ratified, 1995, the juvenile justice system was aligned as much as possible with the adult criminal law system, and the juvenile court divisions disappeared as independent parts of the judiciary.”
It was only in the years that followed that attention to children’s rights steadily increased. “In recent decades, there has been more focus on it, and judges increasingly refer to the Convention in their rulings. It has also been actively promoted by the Children’s Ombudsman, Defence for Children International (DCI) and other children’s rights organisations,” says Uit Beijerse. In her view, the Convention has become an important benchmark: “It is a crucial reference point for both legislators and the courts.”
Strong safeguards, but persistent shortcomings
Several rights of young people are now firmly embedded in the current juvenile justice system. “In practice, there is a safeguard that specialised juvenile judges and juvenile prosecutors always handle juvenile cases, and that young people are assisted by youth law lawyers and guided by juvenile probation services,” Uit Beijerse explains. This aligns with Article 40(3) of the UNCRC, which requires that juvenile cases be dealt with by authorities and institutions specialised in youth.
However, according to Uit Beijerse, the Netherlands still falls short of the Convention’s standards in several areas. For example, there is still no legal requirement that arrests and interrogations be conducted by specialised youth police officers, even though the Convention demands this. The implementation of sanctions is also not always in line with international norms. “Regarding sanctions, the juvenile justice system does include behavioural interventions as alternatives to deprivation of liberty and has specialised juvenile detention institutions. However, interventions are not always available, and the juvenile institutions struggle with a lack of qualified staff to provide adequate attention and guidance to young people,” she notes.
She also highlights a fundamental contradiction within the sanctioning system itself: the law allows young adults aged 18 to 23 to be sentenced under juvenile criminal law, something the Convention encourages, yet simultaneously permits 16- and 17-year-olds to receive adult sanctions in certain circumstances. “That exception is difficult to reconcile with the Convention on the Rights of the Child,” Uit Beijerse stresses.
Focus on the child
In the recent report Een jonge blik op kinderrechten by State of Youth NL, young people note that within the juvenile justice system, “there is too much focus on the offence and too little on the child”. Uit Beijerse finds this an apt observation: “I think it is wonderful to read that young people believe more attention should be paid to the child, which is precisely what Article 3 of the UNCRC requires. It contrasts sharply with the lack of understanding often displayed in the media when a young person who has committed a serious offence receives a juvenile sanction that takes into account their age and personal circumstances.” The tension between public outrage and the protective aims of the Convention is one of the major challenges for juvenile (criminal) law.
New forms of youth crime
Society is changing, and with it the risks facing young people. Uit Beijerse has observed new forms of youth crime emerging in recent years, often with a digital component: “A relatively new phenomenon is that young people are recruited via channels such as Snapchat and Telegram by unknown organisers to commit criminal acts for money – from retrieving drugs at the harbour to placing explosive devices at homes, and even taking part in contract killings.” According to her, this shows that prevention, guidance and protection are more important than ever. Young people must not only be held accountable through the justice system but also shielded from exploitation and manipulation.
Children’s rights in practice
Uit Beijerse sees increasing clarity in how the Convention on the Rights of the Child shapes juvenile justice in practice. In the updated edition of her book Jeugdstrafrecht in theorie en praktijk, published this year, she shows how statutory rules relate to the everyday realities faced by young people coming into contact with the (juvenile) justice system. The book follows the steps that young people encounter, from the police station and pre-trial detention to the various juvenile sanctions and their implementation in juvenile institutions. It places these alongside the standards of the UNCRC. By systematically connecting legislation, practice and children’s rights, the book reveals where the Netherlands has made progress and where compliance with the Convention still falls short.
Looking ahead: Listening, investing and cutting back bureaucracy
According to Uit Beijerse, it is essential to reflect on the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. “In many countries where no separate juvenile justice system existed at all, the Convention has brought about major changes,” she says. This is a good moment to reflect on what it has meant for the Netherlands in recent years and identify where further steps are needed.
Thirty years after ratification, the core message remains unchanged: children’s rights require ongoing commitment. Bringing juvenile justice legislation and practice in line with the principles of the UNCRC, she argues, is the most urgent agenda point for the next decade. She also emphasises the need for structural improvements in order to put this into practice: “We must invest in youth workers and support facilities where young people can access help immediately, without waiting lists. We must listen far more closely to young people with experience of the juvenile justice system and involve them meaningfully in research and policy. The juvenile justice system needs to be stripped of unnecessary bureaucracy and must put children and young people genuinely at the centre.”
- Professor
- Related content
