GB-London: What works to support the youngest children in the criminal justice system and to divert them from perceived criminal behaviour

The age of criminal responsibility (ACR) refers to the minimum age that a child can be prosecuted and punished by law for an offence. England, Wales and Northern Ireland have one of the lowest ACRs in the world at age 10. Campaigners have been calling for the ACR to be raised to reflect international standards and research around child development.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was ratified by the UK government in 1991, calls upon states parties to establish a minimum age "below which children shall be presumed not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law". The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended in 2007 that states set this minimum age at 12 or higher ; in 2019, it revised this to a minimum age of at least 14.

England currently has one of the lowest ACRs in the world: The Child Rights International Network. In theory, that means a child of any age could be convicted and sentenced. Of the states that do have a minimum, North Carolina's is the lowest at seven years.

The proportion of Black children given a caution or sentence is almost three times higher than the proportion of Black children in the 10-17 population, and this has increased over the past 10 years. The proportion of proven more serious offences (for example, robbery and violent crime) was greater for those: • aged 15-17, (15% compared to 10% of offences committed by 10-14 year olds), • black children (23%, with other ethnic groups ranging from 11% to 22%), and • boys (15%, compared to 5% for girls). There is a wealth of evidence that suggests that a 10-year-old's brain is not developed enough to understand that they may be undertaking an act that is criminal, or understanding the consequences. They are also unable to manage the experience in the criminal justice system.

Evidence drawn from the House of Parliament, Age of Criminal Responsibility Briefing Paper (2018) highlights that brain imaging has shown that brain development, especially in the regions involved in decision-making, does not stop in childhood but continues into adulthood.

Furthermore, evidence suggests that younger children have higher levels of re-offending and therefore repeated involvement in the CJS compared to children that have been involved in the CJS at a later age. The younger the child is when first having contact with juvenile justice, then the more likely it is the child will become entrenched in the justice system

There is also a significant impact on the long term outcomes of children and young people. Involvement in the youth justice system reduces the likelihood that children will complete school and obtain educational qualifications. A criminal record also impacts directly on the chances of future employment. Children who have formal contact with the criminal justice system are less likely to be in work as young adults than those whose offending did not result in a formal sanction.