Back to justice for juveniles: The rhetoric and reality of law reform

Abstract

Motivated by growing doubts about the value of a welfare approach towards the processing of young offenders, law reformers in recent years have advocated a shift towards more traditional “justice” principles. This article examines the rhetoric of the “back to justice” trend in one Australian State, South Australia, where in 1976, a Royal Commission into juvenile justice argued in favour of a system which, at least at the adjudication stage, was based firmly on the notions of adversarial justice and due process. Central to this traditional approach is the trial where accused persons invoke their rights by pleading not guilty and putting the prosecution to the test. Yet, as this article demonstrates, the overwhelming majority of young persons in South Australia forego these rights by admitting the allegations made against them. Thus the rhetoric of adversarial justice and the Due Process Model is incompatible with the reality of the routine admission of guilt.