Needs-Based Training Concept

In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’

GENERAL GUIDELINES CHAPTER 6:

TIMETABLE: 552 minutes (60 min. + 492 min. = 9 hours + 12 minutes)  Day 6: Session 1  Day 6: Session 2  Day 7: Session 1  Day 7: Session 2

Including: (60 min.) - Questions–Answer-Session (5 min.) - Looking Back on Yesterday (10 min.) - Energizer (15 min.) - Daily Evaluation (10 min.) - Responsibilities (5 min.) - Questions–Answer-Session (5 min.) - Looking Back on Yesterday (10 min.)

6.1. Learning Objectives of this Chapter 3 min. 6.2. Ordinary and Specialized Professionals in Justice for Child Offenders 22 min. 6.2.1. Professionals in Cases of Children below 9 Years 6 m. 6.2.2. Professionals in Cases of Child Offenders between 9 and 15 Years 10 m. 6.2.3. Professionals in Cases of Child Offenders between 15 and 18 Years 6 m. 6.3. Secondary Traumatization of Child Offenders 20 min. 6.4. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Police Level 96 min. 6.4.1. Ordinary Police and CPU-Police 4 m. 6.4.2. Responsibilities of Police 64 m. 6.4.3. Police at Child Protection Units 28 m. 6.4.3.1. Diversion of First-time offenders and Minor/Petty Offences 17m. 6.4.3.2. Measures Taken by CPUs 11m. 6.5. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Prosecutors Level 58 min. 6.6. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Court Level 281 min. 6.6.1. Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offenders Cases 10 m. 6.6.2. Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offender Cases (9 to 15 years) 200 m. 6.6.2.1. Stage of the Institution of the Proceedings 46m.

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 1 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors

6.6.2.2. Stage of Hearing 41m. 6.6.2.3. Stage of Judgment 77m. 6.6.2.4. ‘Addis Ababa City Administration Social and Civil Bureau Rehabilitation Institute for Juvenile Delinquents’ 36m. 6.6.3. Responsibilities of Judges in Child offenders Cases (15 to 18 years) 66 m. 6.6.4. The Child Friendly Bench in Addis Ababa 5 m. 6.7. Test Yourself! 12 min. My Personal Notes - Total: 492 min.

SEATING ARRANGEMENT:  ‘U-shape’ (tables with space in between; no table in front of trainer)  Small group arrangements (tables and chairs for 4 to 6 participants)  Space for proposition discussion  Space for demonstration  Space for energizer

TRAINING AIDS/EQUIPEMENT:  Copy of the Workbook JfC  Annex 1 ‘Summary of the Third Periodical Report of the Ethiopian Government (28 October 2005)’  Annex 4 ‘Summary of National Legislation on Children and Justice for Children – Relevant Provisions Pertaining to Children’  Annex 9 ‘Real Life Story of Demeke’  Annex 11 ‘Social Inquiry Report on Child Offender’  Overheads: - Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases - Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases - Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases - Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders - 9 to 15 Years - Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years  Flipcharts: - Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offender Cases (partly completed/to be developed together with the participants) (on the wall) - Daily Evaluation (Chapter 2) (on the wall) - Responsibilities (Chapter 1) (on the wall) - Parking Lot (Chapter 1) (on the wall)  Handouts: - Justice for Children Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Non-Serious) - Justice for Children Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Serious) - Justice for Children Process – Child Offenders 15 – 18 years  2x Proposition (A4) (plasticized)  A4-paper ‘AGREE’ + A4-paper ‘DISAGREE’ (proposition discussion)

 Various colours of chalk, flipchart & whiteboard markers, (non-)permanent overhead-pens  Blank overhead sheets, A4-paper, Adhesive tape  Material for energizer

LEARNING OBJECTIVES CHAPTER:  to discussion national legislation on the treatment of child offenders  to understand the responsibilities of judges and prosecutors concerning child offenders  to practice how judges and prosecutors can deal with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner

METHODS:  Explanation  Dialogue  Self Study  Read Aloud  Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion/Explanation)  Small Group Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion)  Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration)  Proposition Discussion  Buzz Group (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion)  Plenary Discussion  Individual Test

PREPARATORY ACTIVITIES:  Copy the handouts for all participants  Prepare one or two energizers  Check the white/black board, flipchart and overhead-projector plus necessary training aids (markers, chalk, extension cord, electricity, etc.)  Prepare extra chair(s) demonstrations  Check if all (relevant) flipcharts of the previous session(s) hang on the wall

Content of Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’: (p.1 of Wb-JfC)

Instructions:  No explanation of ‘Content of Chapter 6’ (is included in §6.1. ‘Learning Objectives of this Chapter’)

6.1. Learning Objectives of this Chapter p.1 6.2. Ordinary and Specialized Professionals in Justice for Child Offenders p.2 6.2.1. Professionals in Cases of Children below 9 Years p.2 6.2.2. Professionals in Cases of Child Offenders between 9 and 15 Years p.3 6.2.3. Professionals in Cases of Child Offenders between 15 and 18 Years p.4 6.3. Secondary Traumatization of Child Offenders p.4

6.4. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Police Level p.6 6.4.1. Ordinary Police and CPU-Police p.6 6.4.2. Responsibilities of Police p.7 6.4.3. Police at Child Protection Units p.13 6.4.3.1. Diversion of First Offenders and Minor/Petty Offences p.13 6.4.3.2. Measures Taken by CPUs p.15 6.5. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Prosecutors Level p.17 6.6. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Court Level p.20 6.6.1. Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offenders Cases p.20 6.6.2. Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offender Cases (9 to 15 years) p.22 6.6.2.1. Stage of the Institution of the Proceedings p.22 6.6.2.2. Stage of Hearing p.26 6.6.2.3. Stage of Judgment p.29 6.6.2.4. ‘Addis Ababa City Administration Social and Civil Bureau Rehabilitation Institute for Juvenile Delinquents’ p.34 6.6.3. Responsibilities of Judges in Child offenders Cases (15 to 18 years) p.40 6.6.4. The Child Friendly Bench in Addis Ababa p.43 6.7. Test Yourself! p.45 My Personal Notes p.46

6.1. Learning Objectives of this Chapter (p.1 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 3 minutes Objective: Being aware of the learning objectives of this chapter Methods: Self Study Aids: -

Method: Self Study Instructions: Invite the participants to examine the learning objectives by themselves

In the sixth chapter we examine to which extent the Ethiopian justice system is child- sensitive to child offenders. The main purposes of this chapter are:  to discussion national legislation on the treatment of child offenders  to understand the responsibilities of judges and prosecutors concerning child offenders  to discuss and practice how judges and prosecutors can deal with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner

At the end of this chapter of the Workbook you should:  concerning your knowledge:  understand all relevant national legislation on child offender cases  know the responsibilities of the police in child offender cases  know the responsibilities of prosecutors in child offender cases  know the responsibilities of judges in child offender cases

 understand how judges and prosecutors can contribute to a child-sensitive practice of the police  understand how judges and prosecutors can treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner in all stages of the justice process  concerning your skills:  be able to apply national legislation in child offender cases in a child-sensitive manner  be able to apply international principles in child offender cases  be able to deal with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner  be able to assist your colleagues in justice for children in a constructive way  concerning your attitude:  be sensitive to child offenders  be willing to reflect on your own approach of child offenders  be willing to change your opinion and attitude concerning child offenders

6.2. Ordinary and Specialized Professionals in Justice for Child Offenders (p.2 of Wb- JfC)

Time: 22 minutes Objective: Knowing which three groups of children/child offenders come in contact with the justice for children system Methods: Dialogue + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’

Method: Explanation ( 3 minutes)

We have already discussed that the Criminal Code (2004) considers three groups of children in connection with child offending behaviour, i.e. on the basis of the age of the child. (§5.2.3. ‘Criminal Responsibility’) These groups are:

 Children below 9 years of age  Child offenders between 9 and 15 years of age  Child offenders between 15 and 18 years of age

6.2.1. Professionals in Cases of Children below 9 Years (p.2 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 3 minutes Objective: Knowing which professionals are involved in cases of children below 9 years Methods: Dialogue Aids:  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’

Method: Dialogue ( 3 minutes)

Instructions:  Ask the participants which professionals are involved in cases of children below 9 years  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover the relevant part of the overhead while explaining (< 9 years)

We do not include the group of children under the age of 9 years in this chapter as they are not criminally responsible and therefore cannot be considered as  child offenders (article 52 of the Criminal Code (2004)). Once the age of the child is proven to be below nine years, the only responsibility and duty of judges and prosecutors in this circumstance, is not to hold the child criminally responsible. Of course, as long as the child’s age is unknown and under examination, the police play a role in cases of children below 9 years (until their age is determined).

Professionals involved in cases of children below 9 years of age: - no police - no judges - no prosecutors

6.2.2. Professionals in Cases of Child Offenders between 9 and 15 Years (p.3 of Wb- JfC)

Time: 10 minutes Objective: Knowing which professionals are involved in cases of children between 9 and 15 years Methods: Dialogue Aids:  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’

Method: Dialogue ( 10 minutes) Instructions:  Ask the participants which professionals are involved in cases of children between 9 and 15 years  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover the relevant part of the overhead while explaining (9 to 15 years – minor/serious offence)

The group of child offenders between 9 and 15 years of age is divided into two subgroups on the basis of the nature of the offence:  child offenders who are alleged of having or have committed a minor offence  child offenders who are alleged of having or have committed a serious offence

Minor Offence: “Minor crimes are crimes,

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justicewhich forare Child punishable Offenders’ with Page 6 of 83 simple imprisonment not exceeding three months or a fine not more than 1000 Birr.” In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors

(Alleged) child offenders between 9 and 15 years of age are classified as ‘young offenders’ and held criminally responsible for their offences (article 53 of the  Criminal Code (2004)). If they are alleged of having committed a minor offence, as per article 89 of the Criminal Code (2004)), the police conduct the investigation as per court order. If the offender is found guilty, the court imposes a special measure (article 53 of the Criminal Code (2004)). The police that are involved in these minor cases can either be working at ordinary police stations or the specialized 'Child Protection Units' wherever they exist. The judges involved in these cases can either be judges working at ordinary courts or working at the specialized ‘Child Friendly Bench’. (§6.6.4. ‘The Child ,Friendly Bench in Addis Ababa’)

Professionals involved in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years who are alleged of having or have committed a minor offence: - ordinary police or specialized police ('Child Protection Units' ('CPUs)) - ordinary judges or specialized judges (‘Child Friendly Bench’ (CFB)) wherever it exists

If the child is alleged of having committed a serious offence, as per article 168 of the Criminal Code (2004), the court directs the public prosecutor to frame a  charge (article 172(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)). The police assist the public prosecutor with the investigation as per the court order. In these serious cases, if the offender is found guilty, the court Serious Offence: has to impose special measures (article 53 of the “For the purpose of a young Criminal Code (2004)). The police that deal with these criminal, a serious crime is a serious cases can either be police working at ordinary crime which is normally police stations or the specialized 'Child Protection Units' punishable with a term of wherever they exist. The judges involved in these cases rigorous imprisonment of ten can either be judges working at ordinary courts or the years or more or with death.” specialized ‘Child Friendly Bench’ wherever it exists. The prosecutors involved in these cases are prosecutors working at ordinary Prosecutors’ Office. (§6.5. ‘Treatment of Child Offenders at the Prosecutors Level’)

Professionals involved in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years who are alleged of having or have committed a serious offence: - ordinary police or specialized police ('Child Protection Units' (CPUs)) - ordinary judges or specialized judges (‘Child Friendly Bench’ (CFB)) wherever it exists - ordinary prosecutors

Background Note for Trainers – Involved Professionals: Also other professionals, like social workers, medical officials, interpreters, prison guards, etc., may be involved in child offender cases. In this Workbook we only discuss the responsibilities of the primary responsible professionals who work in the justice for children system, i.e. the police, prosecutors and judges.

6.2.3. Professionals in Cases of Child Offenders between 15 and 18 Years (p.4 of Wb- JfC)

Time: 6 minutes Objective: Knowing which professionals are involved in cases of children between 15 and 18 years Methods: Dialogue + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’

Method: Dialogue ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Ask the participants which professionals are involved in cases of children between 15 and 18 years  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information  Overhead ‘Professionals Involved in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover the relevant part of the overhead while explaining (15 to 18 years)

Alleged child offenders between 15 and 18 years who have committed either a non-serious offence or a serious offence are considered and treated as adults  (article 56(1) of the Criminal Code). The public prosecutor frames charges and the police assist the public prosecutor with the investigation. According to the Criminal Code (2004), once the court finds the child offender in this age group guilty, it may apply special penalties (article 56(2)). The police, judges and prosecutors that deal with these older child offenders are always working at ordinary police stations, ordinary courts and ordinary Prosecutors Offices. (§6.4.‘Treatment of Child Offenders at the Police Level’; §6.5. ‘Treatment of Child Offenders at the Prosecutors Level’; §6.6. ’Treatment of Child Offenders at the Court Level’)

Professionals involved in cases of child offenders between 15 and 18 years who are alleged of having or have committed an offence: - ordinary police - ordinary judges - ordinary prosecutors

Method: Read Aloud ‘light bulb text’ ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘light bulb text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.4 of Wb-JfC)

A serious structural problem at the police and court levels is the double standard in the treatment and protection of alleged child offenders as not all children can

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 8 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors benefit from the specialized ‘CPUs’ and CFB. ‘CPUs’ are established in Addis Ababa and most regional cities, while the CFB is currently only operational at the Federal level. In the rest of the country, alleged child offenders are dealt with by non-specialized police officers and judges working in ordinary police stations and courts. There is no specialized prosecutor’s office dealing with child offenders who have committed serious crimes.

6.3. Secondary Traumatization of Child Offenders (p.4 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 20 minutes Objective: Understanding that and how child offenders are secondarily traumatized by the justice for children system Methods: Explanation + Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Read Aloud Aids: -

Most alleged and accused child offenders are dealt with by non- Secondary Traumatization of Child Offenders: “ specialized professionals. The Secondary traumatization refers to all police, prosecutors and judges consequences and traumas of which children suffer, working at ordinary police stations, in the short-term and in the long-term, that are not courts and prosecutors’ offices are directly related to the circumstances in which they not trained in justice for children, grow up and their disharmonious development (= children's rights and how to deal primary traumatization), but to the way the children and communicate with child are treated, discriminated against and criminalized offenders in a child-sensitive by professionals in the criminal justice system.” manner, which considerably increases the risk of secondary traumatization. Secondary traumatization refers to all consequences and traumas from which child offenders suffer, in the short-term and in the long-term, that are not directly related to the circumstances in which they grow up and their disharmonious development such as death of parents, violence, neglect, etc., but to the way they are treated, discriminated against and criminalized by the professionals in the justice system. (See: Box ‘Secondary Traumatization of Child Offenders’)

Coming in contact with the criminal justice system is always a very traumatizing experience for child offenders as the current criminal justice system, is not yet fully child-sensitive and protective. International principles such as non-discrimination, the child’s best interests, respect for the child’s views, the right to life, survival and development (§4.5. Binding International Child-Rights Principles’), deprivation of liberty as a measure of last resort, prohibition of torture, special treatment, procedural guarantees, etc. are not always respected by the professionals working in the criminal justice system when dealing with child offenders (§4.6. Binding International Justice for Children Guidelines’). Child offenders are often arrested by the police without understanding what they have done wrong and

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 9 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors without knowing their rights. They are harassed and sometimes even tortured, mistreated and beaten up by the police. They are interrogated, interviewed and cross-examined in a child insensitive way without legal or any other support. Child offenders are sent to court without having any idea of what to expect or is expected of them, who they will meet and if they go back home or go to prison afterwards. They are detained together with adults and dangerous criminals and sometimes also harassed by prison staff. Most are forced to discontinue their education while in prison, do not get enough food and are isolated from their peers.

Coming in contact with the criminal justice system usually also means that the child offender will subsequently be stigmatized by their community and the general public as ‘criminals’ and bear additional negative consequences, such as no employment opportunities, social isolation and exclusion. This might be called ‘tertiary traumatization’ of child offenders.

Method: Read Aloud ‘pointing finger text’ ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘pointing finger text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.5 of Wb-JfC)

There is very often no ‘justice for children’ or at least no justice for many child offenders at this moment as most police officers, prosecutors and judges have  not received adequate training in justice for children, children's rights and child- sensitive treatment and communication. Most child offenders in Ethiopia are not only primary traumatized, but also secondarily traumatized by the professionals in the justice system and tertiary traumatized by the community and general public.

Method: Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) Objective: Understanding how child offenders are secondarily traumatized by professionals in the justice for children system Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the exercise ‘Secondary Traumatization’  Motivate the participants to do the exercise  Maximum 5 minutes (to read the case study and to underline examples of secondary traumatization)

Individual Exercise ‘Secondary Traumatization’: (p.5 of Wb-JfC)

Please read the story of Helen attentively and underline the examples of ‘secondary traumatization’ by the police, prosecutor and judge. Afterwards we will share our findings.

“ … My name is Helen. I am 14 years old and convicted of attempted murder of a woman whom I served as a maid since I was 12 years old. We usually had disputes concerning consumables in the house (like oil, butter) and she always accused me of stealing these items. At one point in time, I was completely annoyed by her continual insults and beatings that I shoved a knife in her belly when we started fighting.

A man in the neighbourhood came when she cried for help and called a policeman. The policeman tied my hands with an electric wire and took me to the Police Station. Once there, he detained me with adult women in a cell. There were more than 20 women in the cell. I had to stay in custody for 4 days. Meanwhile, the policeman would come and take me to his office and ask me questions. His office was always full of people and most of them heard while I answered his questions. That really was embarrassing because the police would shout and say, “What kind of a brute are you that you want to kill your benefactor!?” and then all would turn their faces and look at me disdainfully. After 4 days he took me to the court and when I told the judge that I was fourteen, he said this is a serious case and that the prosecutor should frame a charge. He asked me if I have parents and when I told him that they were dead; he looked at the police man and asked as to where I should stay. The police said; “She could stay at the police station”. The judge then wrote something on the file and told the police to take me back to the cell at the police station. After 2 months, the police came and took me to the court. There was someone who wore a black robe and I stood opposite him. After the judge read the charge to me, he asked me whether I plead guilty or not. When I said I am not guilty of attempted murder, the judge then addressed the man in a black robe, “Prosecutor, you can produce your witnesses.” The first witness was the woman I shoved with the knife herself. After all witnesses were heard, the judge asked me if I want to produce my defence. I didn’t know what that meant and I have no one around me whom I could ask what it really meant. But the judge said, “Answer me, do you want to defend yourself, or do you plead guilty?” Not knowing what to say, I said, “Ok, I am guilty.” Then the judge wrote something on the file, and asked the prosecutor if he has anything to say. The prosecutor replied, looking at me angrily, “Your honour, she is dangerous, cruel and incorrigible … maximum penalty should be imposed.” Then the judge asked me if I wanted to say something, and when I said, ‘No sir, I am not bad or cruel. I didn’t mean to kill the woman, no.” The judge said with a look of surprise on his face; “I wonder if you know what you are saying! A moment ago you said you are guilty, you now want to reverse that. The fact that you are guilty is already settled. I am asking if you have something to say for mitigating the penalty…” Again, I failed to understand what he meant by “mitigate” and because both the judge and the prosecutor did not seem to tolerate my silence, I said; “I have nothing to say.” Then I was sent to serve 4 years of imprisonment in this jail.”

Method: Subsequent Plenary Discussion ( 5 minutes) Instructions:  Invite a participant to present one example of secondary traumatization by the police  Invite another participant to present another example of secondary traumatization by the police  Check if the other participants agree that these are appropriate examples  Make sure the participants discuss with each other and not (only) with you  Invite a participant to present one example of secondary traumatization by the judge  Invite another participant to present another example of secondary traumatization by the judge

 Check if the other participants agree that these are appropriate examples  Make sure the participants discuss with each other and not (only) with you  Continue in this manner with examples of secondary traumatization by the prosecutor  Correct wrong examples  After 5 or 6 appropriate examples you formulate main ideas/conclusions  Give the participants time to make their notes 6.4. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Police Level (p.6 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 96 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of the ordinary police and the CPU-police in child offender cases Knowing which problems the police face in child offender cases Being aware of the consequences for judges and prosecutors if the police do not/cannot take their responsibilities Being aware of the possibilities for judges and prosecutors to act proactively in child offender cases Methods: Dialogue + Explanation + Self Study + Plenary Discussion + Proposition Discussion + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Proposition (A4)

6.4.1. Ordinary Police and CPU-Police (p.6 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 4 minutes Objective: Knowing that alleged child offenders should be brought immediately before the nearest Woreda Court Methods: Explanation Aids: -

With the adoption of a federal state structure, Ethiopia has two types of police, i.e. the federal and regional police. The police have the duty to keep peace and order and to ensure safety in the community. It is also the task of the police to prevent crime and to uphold the law. In their efforts to carry out their tasks police frequently encounter child offenders.

The majority of child offenders come in contact with police officers working in ordinary police stations. These police officers have not received any special training on justice for children and how to deal and communicate with children in a child-sensitive manner. A smaller number of the child offenders is dealt with by specialized police stations, called ‘Child Protection Units’ (CPUs). The officers working in the CPUs have been trained to some extent in justice for children, children's rights and how to deal and communicate with children. CPUs

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 12 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors exist in each of the 10 sub-cities of Addis Ababa, as well as in a number of regional cities. (§6.4.3. ‘Police at Child Protection Units’)

Almost all child offenders come in contact with the police first. Child offenders are arrested by the police or brought to the police station by others, including  the victim, a witness or parents. However, article 172(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) states that the first point of formal contact for child offenders should be the court: “In any case where a young person is involved, he shall be taken immediately before the nearest Woreda Court by the police, the public prosecutor, the parent or guardian or the complainant.”

6.4.2. Responsibilities of the Police (p.7 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 64 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of the ordinary police in child offender cases Knowing which problems the police face in child offender cases Being aware of the consequences for children and judges/prosecutors if the police do not/cannot take their responsibilities Being aware of the possibilities for judges/prosecutors to act proactively in child offender cases Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Self Study + Plenary Discussion + Proposition Discussion + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Proposition (A4)

Method: Explanation ( 1 minute)  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover the relevant part of the overhead (= role of the ordinary police/5 responsibilities)  Show the 5 responsibilities/Do not read aloud and discuss the responsibilities (= content of the next subsections)

Without distinction between the police working in CPUs and ordinary police stations, all police officers dealing with alleged child offenders have the same responsibilities. Their five duties are:

(1) Take the child offender to the nearest court (2) Take the child offender to a hospital for age determination (3) Release the child offender on bail (4) Investigate the case (5) Moral duties

Method: Explanation ( 4 minutes)  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’

 Uncover responsibility 1 on the overhead

(1) According to article 172(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961), the police should take the alleged child offender immediately before the nearest Woreda  court or CFB where it exists. The underlying idea of presenting the child to the court at the earliest possible moment is, among other things, to avoid unnecessary police-custody of alleged child offenders. Article 29 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) deals with the procedures after the offender is arrested. It states: (1) “Where the accused has been arrested by the police or a private person and handed over to the police (Art. 58), the police shall bring him before the nearest court within forty-eight hours of his arrest or so soon thereafter as local circumstances and communications pennit. The time taken in the journey to the court shall not be included.” (2) “The court before which the accused is brought may make any order it thinks fit in accordance with the provisions of Art. 59.” Article 59 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) deals with detention and states: (1) “The court before which the arrested person is brought (Art. 29) shall decide whether such person shall be kept in custody or be released on bail” and (3) “A remand may be granted in writing. No remand shall be granted for more than fourteen days on each occasion.”

According to international legislation, deprivation of liberty of alleged child offenders should be used as a measure of last resort. (§3.7.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’)

Method: Dialogue ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Ask the participants if the police always take this responsibility in actual practice  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information

In practice, the police officers working in the ordinary police stations do not know or understand that they have to take alleged child offenders before the nearest Woreda court as soon as possible. As a consequence many alleged child offenders are deprived of their liberty while their case is investigated by the police. This will eventually render the instruction of the court as to how to undertake the investigation practically irrelevant.

Method: Read Aloud ‘light bulb text’ ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘light bulb text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.8 of Wb-JfC)

Judges and prosecutors should draw the attention of the police that the court should be the first point of official contact for child offenders.

Method: Explanation ( 3 minutes)  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover responsibility 2 on the overhead

(2) The police should take the child for age examination to a hospital as per the order of the court if the age of the alleged child offender is not ascertained.  The ascertainment of the age of the child is crucial in determining whether to apply special procedure and, in case of conviction, to apply the measures and penalties specified for young persons. The court should thus verify the age of the alleged child offender (Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)), and in case the age of the child is not determined, the judge should order for age determination to be conducted and a report to be submitted to the court immediately. However, there is no specific national law that stipulates as to when the age of the young person should be determined (i.e. before or after institution of the proceeding at the court). (§2.4. ‘Age Determination’)

International legislation promotes special treatment for child offenders in all stages of the justice process and states that police, judges and prosecutors should take into account the child's age and individual needs. (§4.6.3.1. ‘Special Treatment during All Stages’)

In the absence of a specific provision on age determination an ambiguous practice has emerged. In some cases, the police take the child to a hospital for age determination before instituting the proceedings to the court. In other cases, the child offender is directly taken to the court and the court orders for age examination. In fact, in many cases, the police take the age the child tells for granted without any further ascertainment. Also many judges are not anxious to verify the age of the offender either; so long as the child appears within the age range she/he claims to be. (§6.6.2.1. ‘Stage of the Institution of the Proceedings’)

Method: Read Aloud ‘pointing finger text’ ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘pointing finger text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.8 of Wb-JfC)

Judges and prosecutors should guarantee that age determination is carried out in each case in which the age of the child offender is not exactly known. Judges should also need to collaborate with medical institutions to ensure the speedy  production of age examination reports.

 Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover responsibility 3 on the overhead

(3) The police should release alleged child offenders on bail whenever possible and certainly in cases where (article 28(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code  (1961)):  the child cannot be taken to the court, for example because of weekend days, holidays, etc.  the child is alleged of having committed a minor offence  it is doubtful that an offence has been committed  it is doubtful that the child has committed the offence complained of  where the offence committed or complained of is not punishable with rigorous imprisonment as a sole or alternative punishment.

If release on bail is not appropriate, the police keep the alleged child offender in police- custody. Article 36(3) of the Constitution (1995) states that the child should be detained separately from adults: “Juvenile offenders admitted to corrective or rehabilitative institutions, and juveniles who become wards of the State or who are placed in public or private orphanages, shall be kept separately from adults.”

Method: Self Study ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the international legislation (p.10 of Wb-JfC)

According to international legislation community-based measures, such as release on bail, should be taken whenever possible so alleged child offenders can stay in their community while awaiting trial. When deprivation of liberty is unavoidable, it should be for the shortest appropriate time and separated from adults. Alleged child offenders who are deprived of their liberty have the right to legal and other assistance during their deprivation of liberty and the right to challenge the legality of their deprivation of liberty. (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’)

In practice, the police usually do not release child offenders on bail, but deprive them of their liberty while their case is investigated. Since most police stations do not have a separate room for detaining children, child offenders are detained together with adults in police-custody. This has of course a very negative impact on the child offender as that makes him/her liable to undesirable influences of (dangerous) adult offenders. The CPUs do not have separate rooms for child offenders either, except in Addis Ketema Sub City Police Station. Other international guidelines on deprivation of liberty are also not respected in most child offender cases, i.e. most child offenders do not receive any assistance and support.

Another practical problem can be the fact that in most of the cases, child offenders reported to the police have no parents/guardian. Because of that, the police might find it difficult to release this category of children on bail as no one comes by to sign the bail bond for them. NGO’s can play an important role in this respect.

Background Note for Trainers – Detention after Arrest: If court is not in session, for example in the weekend, the police should release the accused on bail as per article 28(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) or detain the accused in police custody and bring him/her as soon as possible when the court is in session.

Judges and prosecutors should ensure that child offenders who do not constitute a threat to their community, including child offenders without parents/guardians, are released on bail during the pre-trial stage. If deprivation of liberty is  unavoidable, judges should guarantee that children are separated from adults and get legal and other assistance.

Method: Self Study ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the case study of Ahmed (p.10 of Wb-JfC)

“ … Ahmed was 17-year-old when he came in contact with the justice system. When he was about 5 years old both his parents died. He grew up in an Orphanage where he was educated to 8th grade. The support of the Orphanage stops when the children reach 8th grade. Ahmed had thus to find a way to support himself. He was 14 years old as he started working with a car-owner as an assistant in the transport business. After a couple of months he quarrelled with the owner. The owner went to the police saying that Ahmed injured him. Then Ahmed was taken in police custody, where he was treated very badly. The police gave him the feeling that he was a very dangerous criminal. Later Ahmed transferred to Dire Dawa Main Prison. After several adjournments, the court allowed him to be out on bail of 600 birr. As he has no one to support him, he could not produce a bail for the stated amount. He was then forced to wait for the adjournment 2 months later.”

(4) Article 172(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)) states that ‘The court  may give the police instructions as to the manner in which investigations should

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 17 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors be made.’ Article 59 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) deals with detention and states: (2) “Where the police, investigation is not completed the investigating police officer may apply for a remand for a sufficient time to enable the investigation to be completed” and (3) “A remand may be granted in writing. No remand shall be granted for more than fourteen days on each occasion.” The police should produce all relevant evidence before the ordinary court or CFB where it exists on the date fixed for the hearing. Article 19(4) of the Constitution (1995) states: “In determining the additional time necessary, the court shall ensure the responsible law enforcement authorities carry out the investigation respecting the arrested person’s right to a speedy trial”.

According to international legislation child offenders have the following rights during the pre-trial stage: (§4.6.3.2. ‘Procedural Guarantees’)  no unlawful or arbitrary arrest  innocent until proven guilty  informed promptly and directly of the charges (through parents or legal guardians and in appropriate language)  legal assistance  other appropriate assistance  free assistance of an interpreter  no delay / speedy trial  no compulsion  review by higher authority  privacy fully respected / prohibiting press and public from trial

In practice, most police officers undertake investigation prior to bringing the alleged child offender to court and thus without a court order. In most cases the international guidelines are not respected. Most child offenders are not informed promptly and directly of the charges, are not provided with legal and other assistance and/or an interpreter. Sometimes child offenders are forced to confess. As most of the police officers do not have a specialized training on justice for children/justice for children administration, they usually conduct investigation and gather evidence using investigation techniques applicable to adult offenders.

Method: Read Aloud ‘pointing finger text’ ( 1 minute) Instructions:

 Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘pointing finger text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.11 of Wb-JfC)

Judges should instruct the police as to the manner of investigation and should fix a date for hearing as soon as possible. Judges should ensure that the  investigation is carried out according to international procedural guarantees.

In cases of serious offences the court directs the public prosecutor to frame a charge. In these cases the police have the same duties as discussed above, i.e.:   conducting the investigation as ordered by the ordinary court or CFB (article 172(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961))  submitting the investigation report to the prosecutor without unnecessary delay (article 19(4) of the Constitution (1995))  facilitating the release of the alleged child offender on bail (article 28(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961))  in cases where the alleged child offender should stay in police custody, ensuring that he/she is not detained with adults (article 36(3) of the Constitution (1995))

Prosecutors have to supervise the police as to whether the investigation is  conducted in a manner ordered by the court.

(5) Article 19 of the Constitution stipulates that ‘persons arrested have the right to be informed promptly, in a language they understand, of the reasons for  their arrest and of any charge against them’. In addition to the responsibilities described above, the ordinary police as well as police working in CPUs have the following legal and/or moral duties:  explaining alleged child offenders their rights during arrest and investigation  ensuring that the rights of alleged child offenders are protected  treating alleged child offenders in a child-sensitive manner throughout the process of arrest and investigation  communicating with alleged child offenders in a child-sensitive manner (Chapter 3 ‘Communication with Children’)

 ensuring that alleged child offenders are not secondarily traumatized during the investigation of their case  dealing with child offenders as prescribed by international guiding principles in general (§4.5. ‘Binding International Child-Rights Principles’) and international guiding principles that specifically address child offenders (§4.6. ‘Binding International Justice for Children Guidelines’)

Method: Self Study ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the international legislation (p. 11 of Wb-JfC)

International legislation states that child offenders should be treated in line with the following guiding principles:  non-discrimination  best interests of the child  right to life, survival and development  respect for the child view in all judicial proceedings  special treatment

In practice, most police officers do not explain to alleged child offenders their rights during arrest and investigation and do not ensure that the rights of alleged child offenders are protected. They do not treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner throughout the process of arrest and investigation, do not communicate with alleged child offenders in a child-sensitive manner and do not deal with child offenders as prescribed by international guiding principles.

Method: Plenary Discussion Objective: Being aware of the consequences for the children and for judges/prosecutors if the police do not/cannot take their responsibilities Being aware of the possibilities for judges/prosecutors to act proactively in child offender cases Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Show and point out the responsibilities while discussing  Read aloud the first question of the discussion ‘Consequences for Children and Judges and/or Prosecutors’  Read aloud the second question of the discussion  Read aloud the third question of the discussion  Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Add necessary information/examples and correct wrong information

 Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Maximum 15 minutes (5 + 5 + 5 minutes)

Plenary Discussion ‘Consequences for Children and Judges/Prosecutors’: (p.12 of Wb-JfC)

1. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for the children if the police do not take their responsibilities in child offender cases.  Children may be detained in police custody contrary to the law  They might be denied of their right to bail release  Police might use procedures applicable to adults during investigation of child offender’s cases  Children will be traumatized/victimized by the entire child insensitive procedures followed by the police during investigation

2. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for your work as judges/ prosecutors if the police do not take their responsibilities in child offender cases.  Delay of the justice process  Workload as a result of the lag/delay

3. Discuss possible solutions:  Aware the police on their duties and responsibilities  Set up a monitoring mechanism to follow up whether the police discharge their duties/ responsibilities  Informing the authorities about mistreatment by the police  Remedial measures for mistreated child offenders  Participating in ‘Training on Justice for Children’

Method: Proposition Discussion Objective: Being aware that judges and prosecutors can act proactively in child offender cases Instructions:  Invite the participants to come over to the open space  Explain the rules of ‘Proposition Discussion – Walking Variant’  Proposition (A4)  Show the proposition and read it aloud and slowly  Invite the participants to take their positions (agree/disagree/in between)  Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Motivate the participants to show physically if they change their mind/position  Add necessary information/examples and correct wrong information  Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Give the participants time to note the proposition and to make their notes  Maximum 5 minutes

Proposition Discussion ‘Proactiveness of Judges and Prosecutors’: (p.13 of Wb-JfC)

Define your position with regard to the following proposition and formulate your arguments why you (partly) agree or disagree.

“IT IS EITHER THE DUTY OF JUDGES OR THE DUTY OF PROSECUTORS TO ENSURE THAT CHILD OFFENDERS ARE TREATED IN A CHILD-SENSITIVE MANNER BY THE POLICE!”

I agree/disagree, because:  Disagree: it is the moral duty of both judges and prosecutors to ensure that all children involved in the justice for children system are treated according to national and international law/guiding principles and in a child-sensitive manner. Therefore it is the duty of both judges and prosecutors to be proactive and to closely guide and supervise the investigation and duties of the police.

Judges and prosecutors should ensure that the police deal with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner and respect international guiding principles by being  proactive in closely guiding and supervising the investigation.

6.4.3. Police at Child Protection Units (p.13 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 28 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of the CPU-police Knowing how the CPU-police deals with child offenders Methods: Explanation + Self Study + Plenary Discussion + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’ (CPUs)

6.4.3.1. Diversion of First-Time Offenders and Minor/Petty Offences (p.13 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 17 minutes Objective: Being aware of the practice of diversion by the CPU-police Being aware of the consequences of diversion for judges/prosecutors Methods: Explanation + Self Study + Plenary Discussion + Read Aloud

Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’ (CPUs)

Method: Explanation ( 8 minutes)  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of the Police in Child Offender Cases’  Uncover the role of the CPU-police on the overhead while explaining

Child Protection Units are established since 1997. The total number of 'Child Protection Units’ in the country now stands at 29. That is:  10 CPUs in Addis Ababa  2 CPUs in Dire Dawa Administrative Council  7 CPUs in Oromia Regional State  5 CPUs in Amhara Regional State  5 CPUs in Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples Regional State

Each CPU has a separate office and is normally staffed by one male and one female police officers and one community-worker. This however is not a uniform arrangement in all regions and not even in all the CPUs in Addis Ababa. The CPUs only deal with cases of child offenders who are between 9 and 15 years of age. However, in line with international standards, there is an ongoing debate concerning the fact that CPUs should deal with all child offenders who are criminally responsible and thus up to 18 years of age.

In principle the police working at CPUs have to carry out the duties prescribed by the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) and the moral duties as explained in the  previous subsection. However, the CPU-police in Addis Ababa have played a specific role with regard to alleged child offenders who are accused for the first time and of having committed a minor offence (article 89 of the Criminal Code (2004)).

Practice of CPUs in Addis Ababa in Child-Offenders Cases (9 to 15 years):

Serious offence Police take the child offender immediately to the ordinary and/or court or CFB where it exists (national legislation) Recidivist

Minor/Petty CPU-police divert the case to ‘Community-Based Correction offence and Programme’ after consulting the child’s parents or guardian First time offender (actual practice)

If the alleged offence amounts to a minor offence or petty offence and/or the child offender is a first-time offender, the CPU-police call the parents, guardian or relative of the child responsible for his/her upbringing. They discuss a so-called ‘Treatment Plan’, which will be implemented as the child attends the ‘Community-Based Correction Programme Centre’ (CBCPC). The CBCPC is a kind of diversion programme. (§4.6.3.6. ‘Diversion’) It is an alternative to court appearance and deprivation of liberty together with adults. While attending the programme, the child offender remains in his/her environment. The CBCP

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 23 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors provides educational support, reading materials, apprenticeship, skill training, recreation, guidance and counselling. (Annex 1 ‘Statement 217 of the Ethiopian Government’)

Method: Self Study ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the case study (p.14 of Wb-JfC)

“One 14-years old boy called Abbas has been attending the programme for almost a year at the CBCPC of Arada sub-city. He was arrested by the police for hiding in his house some car spare parts stolen by his friend. “The police came home and took me to another police unit. There I was asked why I helped my friend in stealing these parts and they explained to me how things will happen. I spent one night in the police unit because my father was not available. When my father came the following morning we started discussing about what will happen to me”. The child reported to have spent the night in a separate room with two other children who had also been referred to the CPU for having committed an offence. The child reported: “The police were friendly and did not scare me. During the night I was also fine. We were given food and blankets by the parents of the other children”. The ‘Treatment Plan’ was designed the following day with the police, his father and himself. Afterwards Abbas started coming to the centre to attend the programme. The child reported liking the programme: “It makes me busy. In the centre I can play and spend my spare time when I am not going to school. I also get support from the staff to do my homework. Before joining the programme, I did not have the chance to do all this. I was bored and was involved in gambling and group fighting. I now know that these activities are not good for me and I will not do them anymore”. He reported that his friend did not have the same chance after he was arrested by the police, as he was sent to the court directly because he was older than him. “He spent one month in jail while I was lucky to be sent to this programme.” Importantly, the need to inform the community on the purpose and objective of the programme was raised by the child. “My friends used to wrongly perceive the centre as they thought I was ill treated by the staff. One day I decided to bring them here to see by themselves that they were wrong and that I was doing fine. After that, they also wanted to join the programme.” The child reported that his family is happy that he attends the programme instead of being sent to the court and they know they can rely on the centre. “One day I was absent from the programme and when my father found out he immediately reported to the staff. Another day, I also had a problem with my family and I was able to talk to the staff, this helped me solve the problem by discussing with my family.” Abbas had another month to complete before being discharged from the programme. He is convinced that he will not engage in ‘bad activities’ again as he knows he will not have another chance. However, he also expressed his fear of being bored again after being discharged. “The programme gives me opportunities to study, play and have a place where to spend my spare time usefully outside of school hours. I would like to be able to continue coming to the centre to read books and play if the volunteers allow me. I would also like to help children passing through the same experience as I did. I could teach them not to be involved in bad behaviour and I could also support the programme if they want me to. But I do not know if it will be possible or not and I have not asked yet…”

In practice, ‘Community-Based Correction Programme Centres’ are only available in Addis Ababa and only alleged child offenders between the age of 9 and 15 years who are first-time offenders and have committed a minor/petty offence can benefit from diversion programme. Moreover, only children whose parents or guardians are involved in the process are referred to a ‘Community-Based Correction Programme Centre’. This means that the majority of the alleged child offenders is excluded from diversion at the police level, i.e.:  all child offenders not residing in Addis Ababa  all child offenders between the age of 15 and 18 years  all child offenders between 9 and 15 years who do not have a family or supervision from an adult, like orphans and most street children

Other diversionary measures or community-based measures than the ‘Community-Based Correction Programmes’ are not available at the police level.

The police should divert as many child offenders as possible from formal judicial proceedings and ensure that safeguards are in place. Police should be innovative and divert child offenders to community-based services as well, such as  temporary supervision and guidance, restitution, and compensation of victims.

Background Note for Trainers – Diversion of Child offenders: Some professionals have expressed their concern in case when some alleged child offenders are not compliant with their obligations under the treatment plan of the ‘CBCPC’. The police may lack adequate enforcement mechanisms if they don’t have the support of the court. In addition to that in case of recidivism, the records that are produced by ‘CBCPC’ are not acceptable since, without court conviction, one cannot be said to have prior criminal record.

6.4.3.2. Measures Taken by CPUs (p.15 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 11 minutes Objective: Knowing which measures the CPU-police take in child offender cases Methods: Explanation + Plenary Discussion + Read Aloud Aids: -

Method: Explanation ( 1 minute)

The table at the next page gives you an idea of measures taken in cases of alleged child offenders by the police working in CPUs. The figures only refer to the CPUs in Addis Ababa in 2006. (p.17 of Wb-JfC)

Method: Plenary Discussion Objective: Knowing which measures the CPU-police take in child offender cases Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the discussion ‘Measures Taken by CPU‘s in Child Offender Cases’  Give the participants 4 minutes to examine the table  Ask the participants which good practices they observe  Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Add necessary information/examples and correct wrong information  Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Maximum 10 minutes (4 + 6 minutes)

Plenary Discussion ‘Good Practices of CPUs’ in Child Offender Cases: (p.16 of Wb-JfC)

Please examine the table ‘Measures Taken by CPU’s in Addis Ababa in 2006. The figures reflect some ‘good practices of CPU-police’ concerning the way they deal with alleged child offenders. Discuss with your colleagues at least three good practices of the CPUs.

Good practices of CPU–police:  some alleged child offenders are immediately released from the police station in case  about half the alleged child offenders are sent to hospital for age determination  some alleged child offenders are referred to the ‘Community-Based Correction Program’  a lot of the alleged child offenders are referred to court immediately after apprehension

Number of Children: Measures taken by CPUs in Addis Ababa in 2006: Boys: Girls: Total: 1193 215 1408 Children immediately released from the police station 4 - 4 Children suspected of committing different offensive 531 88 619 activities and sent to hospital for age determination Children suspected in different offensive activities whose 441 53 494 ages have been ascertained by the hospitals Children suspected of petty and minor offences and referred 107 19 126 to the ‘Community-Based Correction Program’. Suspected children referred to court immediately after 968 171 1139 apprehension Suspected children set free upon the decision of the court 72 23 95 Children suspected of committing offensive activities and 621 105 726 released on bail by court order

Children sent to the ‘Remand Home’ upon the decision of the 154 15 169 court. Children suspected of committing offensive activities and 162 28 190 referred to the ‘Remand Home’ because of adjournment Source: Forum on Street Children – Ethiopia (2006), Advocacy and Child Protection Program, Annual Activity and Financial Report, Submitted to Save the Children-Sweden, p.39.

Method: Read Aloud ‘light bulb text’ ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘light bulb text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.17 of Wb-JfC)

Judges and prosecutors can learn from the innovative practice of the CPU-police and especially from their experiences with diversion.

6.5. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Prosecutors Level (p.17 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 58 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of prosecutors in child offender cases Being aware of the problems child offenders face at the prosecutor level Being aware of the problems prosecutors face in child offender cases Being able to find possible solutions in child offender cases Being able to treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Plenary Discussion + Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration) + Proposition Discussion + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases’  Proposition (A4)  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases  Show the responsibilities on the overhead/Do not read aloud and discuss the responsibilities (= content of next subsections)

The responsibilities of prosecutors in child offender cases are very limited and, according to the Criminal Procedure Code (1961), these responsibilities are the same in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years old who are accused of a serious offence and child offenders between 15 and 18 years of age. When the court directs the prosecutor to frame a charge (article 172(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)), prosecutors have the following four duties:

(1) Supervise the police (2) Frame the charge (3) Follow up the court proceedings (4) Moral duties

Method: Dialogue ( 3 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases  Uncover responsibility 1 on the overhead  Ask the participants which national legislation deals with responsibility 1  Ask the participants about the practice of prosecutors with regard to responsibility 1  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information

(1) Prosecutors should supervise the police as to whether the investigation is conducted in a manner ordered by the court (article 8(2) of the Criminal  Procedure Code) and make sure that the police complete the investigation so that the prosecutor can file the case to the court (article 20(1) of the Constitution (1995) cum article 8(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961). (§6.4.2. ‘Responsibilities of Police’) Article 8(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code states: “The public prosecution department may in the discharge of its duties give the necessary orders and instructions to the police and ensure that the police carry out their duties in accordance with law”.

In practice almost all prosecutors wait until the investigation report of the police comes to their desk and do not supervise the investigation. Unless the prosecutor supervises the investigation, there is a possibility for the police not to collect relevant and crucial evidences; delay in the process of investigation; the prosecutor to order the police for further investigation or reinforcement of evidence at a later stage as the police’s investigation report might not be sufficient and thus leading to further delay. The unreasonable delay will in return result in children being detained for a longer period of time.

Prosecutors should be proactive and ensure that the police carry out the investigation of cases of child offenders properly and complete the investigation  so that the prosecutor can file the case to the court.

Method: Explanation ( 3 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases  Uncover responsibility 2 on the overhead  Ask the participants which national legislation deals with responsibility 2

 Ask the participants about the practice of prosecutors with regard to responsibility 2  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information

(2) Prosecutors should frame the charge(s) properly. Article 111 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) provides what the content and form of the charge should  be. Article 111(1) describes the content of the charge: “Every charge shall be dated and signed and shall contain: (a) the name of the accused; and (b) the offence with which the accused is charged and its legal and material ingredients; and (c) the time and place of the offence and, where appropriate, the person against whom or the property in respect of which the offence was committed; and (d) the law and article of the law against which the offence is said to have been committed. Article 111(2) describes the form of the charge: The charge shall be in the form set out in the Second Schedule to this Code or shall conform thereto as nearly as may be.”

Review of prosecution files have revealed that in a large number of cases, the charges were not framed appropriately as per the law. This may result in invoking the wrong provision on the accused, lack of clarity of the content of the file, order by the court for reframing the charge properly, etc. thereby further delaying the trial and wasting the time of both the judiciary and the prosecution.

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases  Uncover responsibility 3 on the overhead

(3) Prosecutors should follow-up all court proceedings, including (moral duty):  making sure that the prosecutor does not absent himself/herself at all stages  of the proceedings in the court  in the event where the accused (= child offender) fails to appear or is not found, asking the court to conduct the proceedings in abstentia

Method: Explanation ( 3 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases  Uncover responsibility 1 on the overhead

(4) In addition to the responsibilities described above, prosecutors have also legal and/or moral duties in cases of child offenders. These are:   explaining accused child offenders their rights during investigation (article 19 of the Constitution),  ensuring that the rights of accused child offenders are protected.  treating accused child offenders in a child-sensitive manner throughout the process.

 communicating with accused child offenders in a child-sensitive manner. (Chapter 3 ‘Communication with Children’).  ensuring that accused child offenders are not secondarily traumatized during the proceedings.  dealing with accused child offenders as prescribed by international guiding principles in general (§4.5. ‘Binding International Child-Rights Principles’) and international guiding principles that specifically address child offenders (§4.6. ‘Binding International Justice for Children Guidelines’).

In practice, hardly any prosecutor is familiar with the international guiding principles and what child-sensitive treatment and child-sensitive communication imply in child offender cases. If prosecutors do not respect these duties, they would end up, among other things, violating the best interest of the child; hindering the child’s right to freely express his/her views and to participate in judicial proceedings; and framing and pressing charges that would tend to incriminate the alleged child offender and in aggravating the penalty in a manner contrary to the rationale of the justice for children administration.

Method: Plenary Discussion Objective: Being aware of the problems children face at the prosecutor level Being aware of the problems prosecutors/judges face in child offenders cases Being able to find possible solutions for problems in child offender cases Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors in Child Offender Cases’  Show and point out the responsibilities while discussing  Read aloud the first question of the discussion ‘Problems Faced by Children and Prosecutors’  Read aloud the second question of the discussion  Read aloud the third question of the discussion  Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Add necessary information/examples and correct wrong information  Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Maximum 15 minutes (5 + 5 + 5 minutes)

Plenary Discussion ‘Problems Faced by Children and Judges’: (p.19 of Wb-JfC)

1. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for the children if prosecutors do not take their responsibilities in child offender cases.  The best interest of the child will be violated  Secondarily traumatization of child offenders  Delay in justice  Charges will be framed that would tend to incriminate the alleged child offender and in aggravating the judgment  the child’s right to freely express his/her views and to participate in judicial proceedings will be hindered

 the penalty will be aggravated in a manner contrary to the rationale of the justice for children administration

2. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for your work as judges if prosecutors do not take their responsibilities in child offender cases.  The judge will have to order for the reframing of the charge which in turn delays the justice process and adding more work load on the judiciary

3. Discuss possible solutions:  Participating in ‘Training on Justice for Children’  Aware the prosecutors on their duties/responsibilities  Set up a monitoring mechanism to control and follow up the discharge of the duties by prosecutors

Method: Small Group Demonstration Objective: Being able to treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the demonstration ‘Explaining the Child’s Rights’  Compose small groups of 4 to 6 persons  Motivate the participants to start their preparation  Maximum 8 minutes (preparation)

Small Group Demonstration ‘Explaining the Child’s Rights’: (p.19 of Wb-JfC)

Imagine that Demeke is accused of a serious offence and that you are the prosecutor in his case. You state that the police have not explained Demeke his right to legal and other assistance during investigation. You decide to explain Demeke his right yourself. Please prepare in written the explanation with your colleagues. Afterwards the trainer will invite some of you to demonstrate/read aloud the explanation. One of you will be the prosecutor and the other Demeke.

Child-sensitive explanation:  Make sure the participants prepare a concrete conversation with Demeke! Explanation of Demeke’s right to legal and other assistance:  Demeke, I realize that the police officer has not explained to you your right to get legal and other assistance during investigation, like, getting support of a lawyer or having a family member around you in the police station. Therefore, I would like to explain to you that according to Ethiopian law you have every right to get legal and other necessary assistance while your case is being investigated by the police.

Method: Subsequent Plenary Demonstration ( 15 minutes) Instructions:

 Invite one group to demonstrate ‘Explaining the Child’s Rights’  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Explaining the Child’s Rights’  Discuss the child-sensitive skills of both demonstrations  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’  Write down at least 5 concrete (!) child-sensitive skills on the flipchart  Discuss 2 or 3 possible improvements  Write down the improvements on the whiteboard (not on the flipchart!)  Maximum 10 minutes for the 2 demonstrations and subsequent discussion  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Explaining the Child’s Rights’ and to include 2 or 3 improvements  Check if the improvements were included  Maximum 5 minutes for the demonstration and subsequent discussion

Method: Proposition Discussion Objective: Being aware that prosecutors can find possible solutions for problems they face in child offender cases Instructions:  Invite the participants to come over to the open space in the classroom  Explain the rules of ‘Proposition Discussion – Walking Variant’  Proposition (A4)  Show the first proposition and read it aloud and slowly  Invite the participants to take their positions (agree/disagree/in between)  Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Motivate the participants to show physically if they change their mind/position  Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Give the participants time to note the proposition and to make their notes  Maximum 5 minutes

Proposition Discussion ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors’: (p.20 of Wb-JfC)

Define your position with regard to the following proposition and formulate your arguments why you (partly) agree or disagree.

“ALSO PROSECUTORS WHO ARE NOT TRAINED IN ‘JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN’ CAN TREAT CHILD OFFENDERS IN A CHILD-SENSITIVE MANNER!” I agree/disagree, because:  Disagree: untrained prosecutors will secondarily victimize children as they do not know the national and international guiding principles to deal with children and they are not skilled in communication with children.

Prosecutors should deal with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner and  according to international guidelines.

6.6. Treatment of Child Offenders at the Court Level (p.20 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 276 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in child offender cases Being aware of the problems child offenders face at the court level Being aware of the problems judges face in child offender cases Being able to find possible solutions for problems in child offender cases Being able to treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Plenary Discussion + Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration) + Self Study + Small Group Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Buzz Group (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years’  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years’  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases‘  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Non-Serious)’  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Serious)’  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 15 – 18 years’

6.6.1. Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offenders Cases (p.20 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 10 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in child offender cases Methods: Explanation + Self Study + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders - 9 – 15 Years’  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders - 15 – 18 Years’

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years‘  Show the responsibilities on the overhead/Do not read aloud and discuss the responsibilities (= content of the next subsections)

All child offenders, i.e. irrespective of their age and the offence they have committed, come in contact with the court and thus with judges during the various stages of the justice process. Only the child offenders who are diverted from the justice system at the police level do not meet with judges. (§6.4.2. ‘Responsibilities of Police’) The responsibilities of judges involved in child offender cases are prescribed in the Criminal Code (2004) and the Criminal Procedure Code (1961). Their duties are:

Responsibilities of judges in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years:  At the stage of institution of the proceedings: (1) Verify the identity, age and trade of the child offender (2) Ask to state the particulars (3) Summon the child’s parent(s) (4) Instruct the police to the manner of investigation (5) Direct the public prosecutor to frame a charge (6) Hand over the child offender to his/her parents  At the stage of hearing: (1) Held proceedings in closed sessions (2) Held proceedings in an informal manner (3) Appoint an advocate  At the stage of judgment: (1) Acquit and set free children who are not guilty (2) Impose the appropriate measure or penalty (3) Assess the measure or penalty based on the Social Inquiry Report (4) Warn, admonish or blame parents (5) Vary/modify the measure or penalty (6) No publication of judgement

Responsibilities of judges in cases of child offenders between 15 and 18 years:  At the stage of judgement: (1) Take into account the circumstances of the case (2) Consider factors for mitigating the penalty (3) Assess the measure or penalty (4) Apply special penalties (5) Make sure that neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment is imposed (6) Send child offenders to a curative or corrective institution

In addition to these responsibilities, judges have also legal and/or moral duties in cases of child offenders. These are:  ensuring that the rights of child offenders are protected  treating child offenders in a child-sensitive manner throughout the process  using institutional correction as a measure of last resort and for the shortest possible time  communicating with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner (Chapter 3 ‘Communication with Children’)  ensuring that child offenders are not secondarily traumatized by police and prosecutors or any other person present at the hearings  dealing with accused child offenders as prescribed by international guiding principles in general (§4.5. ‘Binding International Child-Rights Principles’) and international guiding

principles that specifically address child offenders (§4.6. ‘Binding International Justice for Children Guidelines’)

International legislation states that child offenders should be treated in line with the following guiding principles:  non-discrimination  best interests of the child  right to life, survival and development  respect for the child view in all judicial proceedings  no capital punishment  no life imprisonment without the possibility of release  deprivation of liberty only as measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate time (in the pre-trial and trial stage)  separation from adults during deprivation of liberty  special treatment  community-based measures  legal assistance and other appropriate assistance  free assistance of an interpreter  speedy trial  possibility of review by higher authority  prohibiting press and public from trial

In practice, hardly any judge is familiar with the international guiding principles and what child-sensitive treatment and child-sensitive communication imply in child offender cases. If judges do not respect their legal and/or moral duties, they might end up violating the rights of the child offender and prescribe measures/penalties not in the best interest of the child; deprive the child offender of his/her right to participate in judicial proceedings; inflict secondary trauma on the child, etc.

Judges should deal with child offenders in a child-sensitive manner and according  to international guidelines.

6.6.2.Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offender Cases (9 to 15 years) (p.22 of Wb- JfC)

Time: 200 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years Being aware of the problems child offender between 9 and 15 years face at the court level Being aware of the problems judges face in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years Being able to find possible solutions in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years Being able to treat child offenders between 9 and 15 years in a child-sensitive manner Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Plenary Discussion + Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration) + Self Study + Small Group Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Buzz Group (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Read Aloud + + Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Explanation) Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years’  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases‘  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Non-Serious)’  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Serious)’

6.6.2.1. Stage of the Institution of the Proceedings (p.22 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 46 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years at the stage of the institution of the proceedings Being aware of the problems at the stage of the institution of the proceedings Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Self Study+ Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration) + Plenary Discussion + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years’  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of institution of the proceedings - responsibility 1’ on the overhead

At the stage of the institution of the proceedings judges have the following six duties in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years old:

(1) Judges should verify the identity, age and trade of the alleged child offender. Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) states ‘When the  accused has been brought into the dock his identity, age and trade shall be established.’ In case the age of the child is not determined, the court should order for age determination to be conducted and a report to be submitted immediately to the court by a Medical Institution. (§6.4.2. ‘Responsibilities of Police’) Article 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) assumes that age determination is done before the institution of the proceeding as the court is only requested to verify whether or not the age of the alleged child offender is established. The ascertainment of the age of the child is crucial in determining whether to apply special procedure and, in case of conviction, for applying the measures and penalties specified for young person (article 157 to 175 of the Criminal Code (2004)). (§2.4.2. ‘Crucial Ages of Child Offenders’) as well as to deal and communicate with the child in a child- sensitive manner (§2.5. ‘Child Development’)(§3.5. ‘Child-Sensitive Communication’).

Method: Dialogue ( 3 minutes) Instructions:  Ask the participants about the practice of judges with regard to responsibility 1  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information

In practice, in some cases of child offenders, the responsible CPU-police officers, as well as, ordinary police officers take child offenders to a hospital for age determination before instituting the proceedings to the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ or ordinary criminal court. In other cases, the child offender is directly taken to the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ or ordinary criminal court and the judge orders for age examination. However, in many cases the police take the age the child states for granted, i.e. without any further ascertainment. There are also instances where the police influence or force the child to state a higher age in order to avoid applying special measures. Judges are not always keen in verifying the exact age of the child offender, as long as the child appears within the age range she/he claims to be or the age the police claim to report.

In cases where the order for age examination is given by the court, many problems occur. (§2.4. ‘Age Determination’) The time for the production of the report is very long, which imposes serious delay in the trial of the case and unnecessary deprivation of liberty of child offenders in police custody or in the Addis Ababa Rehabilitation Centre for Juvenile Delinquents. The report only gives an age range and not the accurate age of the child, which results in many child offenders running the risk of their cases being referred to the adult court. Judges usually take the upper limit of the age range. Considering the existing circumstances, judges need to closely collaborate with medical institutions to ensure the speedy production of age examination reports and to clarify why and which ages of child offenders are crucial in the justice for children process.

Judges should verify the identity, age and trade of the alleged child offender and if his/her age is not exactly known judges should order for age determination. In cases an age range is given judges should take the lower limit  or at least the average of the age range.

International legislation promotes special treatment for child offenders in all stages of the justice process and states that police, judges and prosecutors should take into account the child's age and individual needs. (§4.6.3.1. ‘Special Treatment during All Stages’)

Method: Explanation ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of institution of the proceedings - responsibility 2’ on the overhead

(2) Judges should ask the person who brings the alleged child offender to the court to state (article 172(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)):   the particulars of the offence  the witnesses (if any)  or to make a formal complaint

Method: Explanation ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of institution of the proceedings - responsibility 3 on the overhead

(3) Judges should summon the child’s parent(s), guardian or other person having similar responsibilities if the child appears on his/her own before the court.  (article 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)).

Judges should ensure that the parents of the child offender, or any other supportive adult, is present during all proceedings so the child feels at ease as much as possible and can express his/her thoughts and views with the help of  his/her parent.

International legislation emphasizes the presence of parents or other supportive adults only explicitly by stating that ‘child offenders should be informed promptly and directly of the charge(s) through parents or legal guardians’. The international guideline that every child offender has the right ‘to have legal or other appropriate assistance in the preparation and presentation of his or her defence’ can be interpreted broadly. (§4.6.3.2. ‘Procedural Guarantees’)

Method: Small Group Demonstration Objective: Being able to treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the demonstration ‘Summoning the Child’s Parents’  Compose small groups of 4 to 6 persons  Motivate the participants to start their preparation  Maximum 8 minutes (preparation)

Small Group Demonstration ‘Summoning the Child’s Parents’: (p.24 of Wb-JfC)

Imagine that you are the judge in Helen’s case (§6.3. ‘Secondary Traumatization of Child Offenders’). Helen is brought before your court by the police. Her parents are not present. Explain to the child that her case should be postponed, because her parents (or guardians) should be present during the proceedings. You prepare a text how you can explain this situation to Helen in a child-sensitive manner. Make sure Helen gets the chance to express her views freely. (§4.5.5. ‘Right to Participate’) Afterwards the trainer will invite some of you to demonstrate how judges can explain and ‘summon the child’s parents’ in a child- sensitive manner. One of you will be the judge and the other Helen.

Child-sensitive explanation:  Make sure the participants prepare a concrete conversation with Helen!  Helen, I would like to tell you that, for various reasons, it is important that your parents are in the court when we discuss your case. For example, your parents can explain things that are not clear for you or things you do not know yourself. But as you see they are not here today and I will have to send for your parents and see you together with them on the next meeting which is scheduled to take place within a few days. Is that alright with you, Helen? Do you have any question?

Method: Subsequent Plenary Demonstration ( 15 minutes) Instructions:

 Invite one group to demonstrate ‘Summoning the Child’s Parents’  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Summoning the Child’s Parents’  Discuss the child-sensitive skills of both demonstrations  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’  Write down at least 5 concrete (!) child-sensitive skills on the flipchart  Discuss 2 or 3 possible improvements  Write down the improvements on the whiteboard (not on the flipchart!)  Maximum 10 minutes for the 2 demonstrations and subsequent discussion  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Summoning the Child’s Parents’’ and to include 2 or 3 improvements  Check if the improvements were included  Maximum 5 minutes for the demonstration and subsequent discussion

(4) Judges should give the police instruction as to the manner in which investigations should be made (article 172(2) of the Criminal Procedure  Code (1961)). (§6.4.2. ‘Responsibilities of Police’)

As ordinary police officers do not have a specialized training on the administration of justice for children, they usually investigate cases of child offenders and gather evidence by using investigation techniques applicable to adult offenders. The court should anticipate such negative situations and order the police on how to conduct the investigation in a child- sensitive manner at the first appearance of the child in the court. Most police working in CPUs know that they have to investigate child offenders’ cases only after receiving order from the court. If judges do not give the police instruction as to the manner of investigation, the child may not have enough confidence in the overall justice process and may even deny statements given in the police station when he/she ultimately appears before the judge; thereby necessitating further evidence and; what is more, delaying and, at times, frustrating the overall justice process.

Judges should order the police on how to conduct the investigation in a child- sensitive manner and in the best interests of the child at the first appearance of  the child in the court.

(5) Judges should direct the public prosecutor to frame a charge in cases where the accusation relates to an offence punishable with rigorous imprisonment  exceeding ten years or with death (article 172(3) of Criminal Procedure Code (1961)) (§6.5. ‘Treatment of Child Offenders at the Prosecutors Level’)

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of institution of the proceedings - responsibility 6 on the overhead

(6) Judges should ensure that child offenders can stay in their own environment and avoid deprivation of liberty as much as possible if the case is adjourned or  has to be transferred to a superior court for trial. Article 172(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) states: ’Where the case requires to be adjourned or to be transferred to a superior court for trial, the young person shall be handed over to the care of his parents, guardian or relative and in default of any such person to a reliable person who shall be responsible for ensuring his attendance at the trial. The witnesses shall be bound over to appear at the trial.’

Method: Self Study ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the international legislation (p. 25 of Wb-JfC)

International legislation promotes community-based measures and considers deprivation of liberty as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate time. Other guarantees for deprivation of liberty are:  prohibition of unlawful and arbitrary deprivation of liberty  special treatment during deprivation of liberty, including: . humanity and respect . taking into account the child’s needs and age . separation from adults . maintaining contact with family  legal assistance during deprivation of liberty  other assistance during deprivation of liberty  challenge the legality of deprivation of liberty

In practice, if the child is not handed over to the care of his/her parents, guardians, etc. he/she will be detained in police custody or in the Addis Ababa Rehabilitation Centre for Juvenile Delinquents. That, of course results in the child being unduly deprived of his/her liberty and also financial implications for the police station and/or the Rehabilitation Centre as the child will have to be provided with space, meals, sanitary facilities, etc. In cases where the court cannot hand over the young person owing to the default of any such person, i.e. especially in cases of orphans and street children, judges should be proactive in seeking the support of care giving institutions and NGOs that could act as guardians in the best interest of the child. Unfortunately such practice is not at all developed yet.

Judges should take community-based measures and be proactive in seeking the support of care giving institutions and NGOs if child offenders do not have  parents or supportive adults. Judges should only use deprivation of liberty as a measure of last resort. Judges should make sure, as much as possible, that all child offenders are provided with (legal) assistance, but certainly in cases where no parent or other supportive adult is present or the child is accused of a serious offence.

6.6.2.2. Stage of Hearing (p.26 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 41 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years at the stage of hearing Being aware of the problems at the stage of hearing Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Plenary Discussion + Small Group Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years’  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’  Annex 11 ‘Social Inquiry Report on Child Ofender’

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘

 Uncover ‘stage of hearing - responsibility 1’ on the overhead

At the stage of hearing judges have the following three duties in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years old: (1) Judges should make sure that all the proceedings are held in closed sessions. (‘chambers’) Article 176(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)) states that:  ‘Nobody shall be present at any hearing except witnesses, experts, the parent or guardian or representatives of welfare organizations. The public prosecutor shall be present at any hearing in the High Court’.

International legislation states that child offenders have the right to ‘have his or her privacy fully respected at all stages of the proceedings’ and ‘prohibit the press and the public from trial of child offenders’. International legislation also emphasizes the right of every child offender to have:  appropriate assistance  free assistance of an interpreter

In practice, in most cases parents are present, except in cases where the alleged child offender is an orphan or street child, and take the responsibility to ensure the attendance of their child during trial and also take the responsibility to ensure the supervision of the child in case a measure for home arrest is issued by the court. If judges fail to hold the proceedings in chambers, he/she will increase the risk of stigmatization, secondary trauma and the adverse effect of creating a criminal self-image in the child.

Judges should broadly interpret this provision in order to work with and allow the presence of social workers and/or psychologists in all sessions with the view to enabling the child offender to get psycho-social support. In addition, social workers and/or psychologists can prepare a social inquiry report on the background, personal circumstances, education, antecedents, etc. of the child offender so that the judge can use the report to take a decision in the best interests of the child, if convicted. Social inquiry reports constitute an indispensable aid in the legal proceedings involving children. Prior to sentencing, the judge should be informed of relevant facts, including the background and circumstances in which the child is living, educational experience, as well as factors related to the commission of the offence.

However, in practice social inquiry report is not always considered, except in the Child Friendly Benches. Because of that, judges render their decision in child offender cases without taking into account social facts and circumstances that lead the child to come in contact with the law.

Method: Read Aloud ‘pointing finger text’ ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘pointing finger text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.27 of Wb-JfC) Judges should hold all cases of child offenders in closed sessions, so their privacy is fully respected. Judges should also request a social inquiry report and  allow the presence of social workers and/or psychologists, as well as an interpreter, whenever needed, in all sessions and judges should be proactive in involving these professionals in cases of child offenders.

Method: Small Group Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) Objective: Understanding the relevance of a SIR in child offender cases Being able to judge the importance of a SIR in a particular child offender case Instructions:  Compose small groups of 4 to 6 persons  Read aloud the instruction of the exercise ‘Social Inquiry Report in Child Offender Cases’, including the questions  Annex 11 ‘Social Inquiry Report on Child Offender’  Motivate the participants to read the SIR attentively  5 minutes (reading SIR)  Motivate the participants to start with the first question  Motivate the participants to continue with the second question after 5 minutes  Maximum 15 minutes (5 + 5 + 5 minutes)

Small Group Exercise ‘Social Inquiry Report in Child Offender Cases’: (p.26 of Wb-JfC)

Please read the Social Inquiry Report (Annex 11 ‘Social Inquiry Report’)(p.83 of Wb-JfC) and discuss the following two questions.

What are advantages of a Social Inquiry Report?  gives the chance for the child offender’s views to be heard  gives the judge concrete information about the background/upbringing of the young offender  assists the judge in appreciating those factors in a child offender’s life  helps the judge in choosing an appropriate rehabilitative measure  allows the judge to take the most appropriate decision/decision in the best interests of the child

In addition to the comments and recommendations of the social worker in the Social Inquiry Report, what other steps/considerations do you think the judge should take to come up with a decision that is in the best interest of the child?  the judge could have gathered other/additional evidence, like inquiring other persons (like school, peers, etc.) besides the word given by the stepmother of the child to the social worker in the SIR

 the judge could have made a direct examination of the accused child offender during the trial without being biased to the outcome and commission/omission of the offence by trying to approach the child offender in a child friendly way and hear the child’s view and give chance to the child in choosing the appropriate measure Method: Subsequent Plenary Discussion ( 8 minutes) Instructions:  Invite one group to present their answers/opinions to the first question and request the other groups to reply/add  Make sure the participants discuss with each other and not (only) with you  Invite another group to present their answers’/opinions to the second question and request the other groups to reply/add  Add necessary information and correct wrong information  Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Give the participants time to make their notes

Method: Explanation ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of hearing - responsibility 2’ on the overhead

(2) Judges should make sure that all child offender cases are conducted in an informal manner and an atmosphere of understanding. The purpose of an informal  hearing is to make the child at ease and guarantee that she/he can speak freely without fearing the normal courtroom proceedings. Article 176(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) states: ‘All proceedings shall be conducted in an informal manner.’

International legislation promotes the right of child offenders ‘to express their opinions freely in all matters affecting them’. Judges should take the child’s view into consideration. The importance given to the child’s view depends on his/her age and maturity. (§4.5.5. ‘Right to Participate’)

In principle ‘informal hearings’ can be realized in all criminal courts, i.e. each ordinary bench as well as Child Friendly Benches. Promising Practice: Creating an atmosphere of Judges assigned to deal with child offenders cases understanding is not merely a within the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ do not follow the matter of furniture, clothes and rigid formalities of an ordinary court session. They seating arrangement. To allow the do not wear the formal gown and do not sit on the child to express his/herself freely, ordinary court bench. Hearings are conducted mostly judges have to listen actively, ask in the judges’ office where the case is discussed open-ended questions and make sure with the child, the responsible police officer and the that they do not create parents, if they are available, in an informal and communication barriers. (§3.3. child-sensitive manner. ‘Communication Skills’)

Method: Explanation ( 3 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of institution of the proceedings - responsibility 3’ on the overhead

(3) Judges should appoint an advocate in two kinds of cases:  where no person appears to represent the child   where the child is accused of a serious offence Article 20(5) of the Constitution provides that ‘accused persons have the right to be represented by legal counsel of their choice, and, if they do not have sufficient means to pay for it and miscarriage of justice would result, to be provided with legal representation at state expense’. Article 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) further states that: ‘The court shall appoint an advocate to assist the young person where (a) no parent, guardian or other person in loco parentis appears to represent the young person, or (b) the young person is charged with an offence punishable with rigorous imprisonment exceeding ten years or with death.’

A child offender not provided with legal assistance will run the risk of losing his/her defence as he/she may be unaware of the law and court room jargon, may feel quite insecure and be intimidated by the court atmosphere. Promising Practice: Miscarriage of justice Recently, the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ at the Federal First Instance will also occur. In Court at Lideta Branch has been able to assign advocates and a practice judges do not social worker to alleged child offenders. This has been made assign advocates in possible as a result of a Memorandum of Understanding signed cases where the child among different stakeholders including the Federal First Instance is not represented Court and the Children’s Legal Protection Center of the African because such service Child Policy Forum (ACPF) with the support of UNICEF and Save is not accessible in the Children Sweden. Through the legal and social assistance, Ethiopia. This means alleged child offenders brought to this particular bench were able that the child to avoid detention in the first place, prove their innocence or offender has to face mitigate the penalty once found guilty. This exemplary initiative of all the proceedings by the court in proactively creating a link with stakeholders for the him/herself. In cases realization of the best interest of child offenders is a promising of serious offences, practice that should be replicated by all courts in all the regional the right of child states. ACPF is also providing legal aid to child-offenders in offenders to legal Awassa, Jimma, Dessie, Bahir Dar, Debre Berhan, Ambo and assistance is violated, Adama/Nazareth with the support of UNICEF. which results in passing measures or penalties prejudicial to the best interest of the child offender.

International legislation emphasizes that ‘every child alleged as or accused of having infringed the penal law’ has the right to legal assistance (article 17(2iii) of the ACRWC; article 40(2bii) of the CRC)).

Pending the establishment of CFBs, judges at ordinary courts should incorporate special procedures suggested above that are designed to take into account the  specific needs and the views of the child offender .

6.6.2.3. Stage of Judgment (p.29 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 77 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years at the stage of judgment Being aware of the problems at the stage of judgment Methods: Explanation + Dialogue + Self Study + Plenary Discussion + Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration) + Buzz Group (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) + Read Aloud Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years’  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of judgement - responsibility 1’ on the overhead

At the stage of judgment, judges have the following five duties in cases of child offenders between 9 and 15 years old:

(1) Judges should acquit and immediately set alleged child offenders free where  they are not found guilty (article 177(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961)).

Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of judgement - responsibility 2’ on the overhead (2) Judges should impose the appropriate measure or penalty under article 157 to 168 of the Criminal Code (2004) where the alleged child offender is found guilty  (§5.2.3.2. ‘Children between 9 and 15 Years of Age’).

The ‘measures’ for child offenders can be ‘non-institutional’, including:  supervised education  reprimand/censure  school arrest  home arrest The measures can be ‘institutional’ as well, including:  curative institution  corrective institution

These measures are solely designed to result in the ‘rehabilitation’ of the child without resorting to any element of ‘punishment’. The ‘penalties’ applicable to child offenders on the other hand serve the purpose of punishment and have to be resorted to only when the ‘measures’ which have been applied have failed (article 166, Criminal Code,2004). The penalties for child offenders are:  fine in cases where the child offender is capable of paying and realizing the reason for its imposition  imprisonment in case of a serious offence which is normally punishable with a term of rigorous imprisonment of ten years or more or with death (in adult cases): . in a corrective institution where special measures for safety, segregation or discipline can be applied (§6.6.2.4. ‘Addis Ababa City Administration Institute for the Rehabilitation of Juvenile Delinquents’) . in a penitentiary detention institution if he/she is incorrigible and is likely to be a cause of trouble, insecurity or corruption to others where the principle of separation between children and adults shall be applied (article 168(1)(b) cum article 110(2) of the Criminal Code (2004)).

International legislation states that deprivation of liberty of child offenders should be a measure of a last resort (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’) and promotes the reintegration of child offenders and community-based measures as alternatives to institutionalization and detention for child offenders: (§4.6.3.1. ‘Special Treatment during All Stages’)(§4.6.3.5. ‘Special Measures’)(§4.6.3.6. ‘Diversion’)

Method: Dialogue ( 3 minutes)

Instructions:  Ask the participants about the practice of judges with regard to responsibility 2  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information As prescribed in the Criminal Code (2004), Supervised Education (art.159) the child offender should be entrusted to the care of, among other options, organization for the education and protection of children where the local authorities shall be responsible for the control of the measure; while in the case of School or Home Arrest, the court orders the child to be kept at school or in his home during his free hours or holidays and perform specific task adapted to his age and circumstances. We can see that these provisions contain some grains of community-based measures for the child offender. The actual problem is thus not the absence of legal provisions to this effect, but the absence either of knowledge of the judges of these provisions or of the absence of institutions providing these services; or, the absence of both elements in most of the instances. In instances where judges are aware of these provisions but the institutions are not available, the judges would be bound to resort to other, non community-based measures. But a promising practice has developed by the CFB at the Federal First Instance Court where convicted child offenders are sent to the Community- Based Correction Programmes Centres (CBCPC) with a view of rehabilitating them within the community.

Judges should be proactive in applying community-based measures and divert child offenders to community-based programmes, such as temporary supervision and guidance, restitution, and compensation of victims as much as possible as it  implies that they can stay in their own environment and social support system.

Method: Buzz Group (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) Objective: Being aware of alternatives to deprivation of liberty Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the exercise ‘Appropriate Measures’  The participants may form a buzz group of two or three colleagues  Motivate the participants to start the exercise  Maximum 3 minutes

Buzz Group ‘Appropriate Measures’: (p.30 of Wb-JfC)

Please discuss with your two/three neighbours at least three ‘alternative measures’ judges can take instead of depriving child offenders of their liberty.

Alternatives to deprivation of liberty:  community-based measures

 supervised education  reprimand/censure  school arrest  home arrest  foster care (if available)  sending child offenders to CBCPCs  temporary supervision and guidance  restitution and compensation of the victim(s)  community service

Method: Subsequent Plenary Discussion ( 5 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to discuss the alternatives  Motivate the participants to talk to each other and not (only) to you and try to involve all participants in the discussion  Add necessary information and correct wrong information  Give the participants time to make their notes

(3) Judges should assess the measure to be taken or the penalty to be imposed and take into account the Social Inquiry Report. The following factors should be  taken into consideration:  the age, character, degree of mental and moral development of the child offender (article 55 of the Criminal Code (2004))  information about the conduct, education, position and circumstances of the child offender by examining his/her parents, representatives of the school, guardianship authorities, institution concerned and look into files, particulars, medical and social reports in the possession of the above persons/institutions concerning the child offender and his/her family (article 54(1) of the Criminal Code (2004))  expert evidence, where necessary, regarding the physical and mental condition of the child offender (article 54(2) of the Criminal Code (2004))  whether the measure/penalty has reformative and educative purpose (article 1 of the Criminal Code (2004))  deprivation of liberty is used as a measure of last resort (article 37(b) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child cum article 9(4) of the Constitution)  separation from adults during detention (article 36(3) of the Constitution)  the substitution of compulsory labour for simple imprisonment wherever by reason of local administrative difficulties the execution of the sentence of simple imprisonment is not possible (article 107 of the Criminal Code (2004))

Method: Self Study ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the international legislation (p.31 of Wb-JfC) International legislation states that ‘a variety of dispositions shall be available to ensure that children are dealt within a manner appropriate to their well-being and proportionate both to their circumstances and the offence’. (§4.6.3.53. ’Special Measures’) The following concrete guidelines are formulated:  no capital punishment  no life imprisonment  deprivation of liberty as measure of last resort  deprivation of liberty for the shortest appropriate time  separation from adults  community-based measures and reintegration

In practice judges look for information about the conduct, education, position and circumstances of the child offender; though their source of information is either the child himself/herself or the police officer or parents (if available). They do not request for a social inquiry report compiled and commented on by a professional. The CFB has, however, started to use this approach, which has enabled the judges to make their decision based on comprehensive information. With regard to examining the physical and mental conditions of child offenders, judges refer such child to a mental hospital for expert examination. However, such step will be challenging given the fact that such institutions might not be accessible.

Judges do not impose capital punishment and life imprisonment on child offenders, However, reformative and educative measures are not used by judges because such alternative are not available in Ethiopia. Deprivation of liberty is thus considered not as a last resort, but rather as the only option. However, we should bear in mind that children between the ages of 9 to 15 who have committed minor offences for the first time are referred to community-based correction programmes by the police in Addis Ababa.

The problem with separation from adults is the fact, especially in the regions, that the child offenders are not separated from adult criminals as there are no separate facilities for child offenders. With regard to substitution of compulsory labour for simple imprisonment, in practice the provision is rarely used in child offender cases. Meaning, that when there is no separate cell or institution for a child offender, the measure resorted to is not that of compulsory work but that of sending the child to adult prison.

Method: Read Aloud ‘pointing finger text’ ( 1 minute)

Instructions:  Invite a particular participant to read aloud the ‘pointing finger text’ and request the other participants to follow attentively (p.32 of Wb-JfC)

Judges should take into account all relevant information concerning child offenders in order to take a decision in the child’s best interest. Judges should  take community-based measures and use deprivation of liberty and institutionalization as measures of last resort.

(4) Judges should warn, admonish or blame parents or other responsible adults if they have failed to take their responsibilities as parents or guardians. (§2.6.1.  ‘Child-Sensitive Environment’) Article 178 of the Criminal Procedure Code (1961) states: ‘Where it thinks fit the court may warn, admonish or blame the parents or other person legally responsible for the young person where it appears that they have failed to carry out their duties’.

In practice, this measure is not even considered as an option. However, in most child offender cases it is very appropriate to focus on parents rather than solely on the child. Judges should look for ways of constructively involving both parents and children in the measures they take, for example supportive activities to the community. Follow-up measure could be ensured by judge through a kind of a regular report the parents or the child submit to the court.

Method: Small Group Demonstration Objective: Being able to treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the demonstration ‘Warning, Admonishing or Blaming the Parent/Guardian’  Compose small groups of 4 to 6 persons  Motivate the participants to start their preparation  Maximum 8 minutes (preparation)

Small Group Demonstration: ‘Warning, Admonishing or Blaming the Parent/Guardian’: (p.33 of Wb-JfC)

Imagine that you are the judge in Demeke’s case and that you decide to warn, admonish or blaming the woman Demeke is working for (Demeke’s guardian). Discuss with your colleagues how you can do that in a way that is in the best interests of Demeke as well as in a language that is understandable for both the guardian and Demeke himself. Also discuss if you only invite the parents/guardian or if Demeke will be present too. Afterwards the trainer will invite some of you to demonstrate this ‘warning, admonishing or blaming’. One of you will be the judge, one of you will be Demeke and another Demeke’s guardian.

(Child-)sensitive conversation:  Mrs. X, I see that you are for a large part responsible for Demeke’s delinquent behaviour. As an adult and a care taker of Demeke, you should have known better than insulting and abusing him whenever a thing is lost in the house or for whatever reason. He is a young boy growing into adulthood and your manner of dealing with him has so many consequences on his future life. Even though Demeke takes partial responsibility for his actions, you are by far the one who should be reproved and censured for your unfair and irresponsible treatment of Demeke which resulted in the offence that he is now accused of. So you should take every responsibility in the future to see to it that he is brought up in a sensitive and understanding manner and that his future behaviour reflects on how you nurtured him. Case closed!

Method: Subsequent Plenary Demonstration ( 15 minutes) Instructions:  Invite one group to arrange the seating and to demonstrate ‘Warning, Admonishing or Blaming the Parent/Guardian’  Invite another group to arrange the seating and to demonstrate ‘Warning, Admonishing or Blaming the Parent/Guardian’  Discuss the child-sensitive skills of both demonstrations  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’  Write down at least 5 concrete (!) child-sensitive skills on the flipchart  Discuss 2 or 3 possible improvements  Write down the improvements on the whiteboard (not on the flipchart!)  Maximum 10 minutes for the 2 demonstrations and subsequent discussion  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Warning, Admonishing or Blaming the Parent/Guardian’ and to include 2 or 3 improvements  Check if the improvements were included  Maximum 5 minutes for the demonstration and subsequent discussion

(5) Judges should vary or modify the measure they have taken or the penalty they have imposed if that is in the best interests of the child. Article 180 of the  Criminal Procedure Code (1961) states: ‘Any court which has sentenced a young person to a measure may at any time of its own motion or on the application of the young person, his legal representative or the person or institution to which he was entrusted, vary or modify such order if the interest of the young person so requires.’ International legislation emphasizes that for any action and decision concerning children in general and child offenders in particular ‘the best interests of the child’ should be the guiding principle. (§4.5.3. ‘Best Interests of the Child’)

Method: Dialogue ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Ask the participants about the practice of judges with regard to responsibility 5  Formulate follow-up questions or add/give necessary information

In practice, judges hardly resort to implementing this provision. There is no probation officer to report the need for modification of the sentence and judges are too preoccupied to revisit “dead” files.

Method: Explanation ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 9 to 15 Years‘  Uncover ‘stage of judgement - responsibility 6 on the overhead

(6) Judges should make sure that the judgement is not published. Article 174 of the Criminal Code (2004) states: “The publication of the judgment in respect to  young criminals shall never be effected through the mass media (Art. 155). The entry in the Judgment register (Art. 156) of the measures and penalties affecting them shall be made merely for the information of the official, administrative or judicial authorities concerned. In no case shall excerpts from their record be communicated to third parties.”

Method: Plenary Discussion Objective: Being aware of the problems children face at the court level Being aware of the problems prosecutors/judges face in child offenders cases (9 to 15 years) Being able to find possible solutions for problems judges face in child offender cases (9 to 15 years) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offender Cases (9 – 15 year)’  Show and point out the responsibilities while discussing  Read aloud the first question of the discussion ‘Problems Faced by Children and Judges’  Read aloud the second question of the discussion  Read aloud the third question of the discussion

 Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Add necessary information/examples and correct wrong information  Formulate main ideas/conclusions  Maximum 15 minutes (5 + 5 + 5 minutes)

Plenary Discussion ‘Problems Faced by Children and Prosecutors’: (p.34 of Wb-JfC)

1. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for the children if judges do not take their responsibilities at the various stages of the justice process in child offender cases.  Measure that is not in the best interest of the child may be imposed  The measure taken may be detrimental to the well-being and rehabilitation of the child offender  May be made liable to punishments that are only applicable to adult offenders

2. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for your work as prosecutors if judges do not take their responsibilities at the various stages of justice process in child offender cases.  -

3. Discuss possible solutions:  Aware the judges on their responsibilities at the stage of judgment  Participating in ‘Training on Justice for Children’

6.6.2.4. ‘Addis Ababa City Administration Social and Civil Affairs Rehabilitation Institute for Juvenile Delinquents’ (p.34 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 36 minutes Objective: Being aware of the existence and problems of the ‘Rehabilitation Institute’ for child offenders Being able to apply national legislation on deprivation of liberty in line with international standards Methods: Self Study + Dialogue + Explanation + Plenary Discussion + Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) Aids:  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Non-Serious)’  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders 9 – 15 years (Serious)’

One of the measures or penalties judges can impose on child offenders between 9 and 15 years is the ‘admission to a curative institution and corrective institution’ (article 162 of the Criminal Code (2004)). There is only one such corrective institution in the whole country, that is the Rehabilitation Institute. Although the Institute is established as a facility for convicted child offenders between 9 and 15 years old, it is also used for:  accused child offenders whose case is pending in the court (‘Remand Home’)  convicted child offenders between 15 and 18 years.

The main objective of the Institute is to rehabilitate and reintegrate convicted child offenders between 9 and 15 years old through providing adequate social, educational, vocational, psychological, medical and physical assistance. Child offenders can attend both vocational training, that is woodwork, metal work and tailoring, and formal education up to grade eight based on the regular curricula of the Ministry of Education. As such, the Institute is a better alternative than depriving child offenders of their liberty through imprisonment together with adults and without (proper) education and other facilities.

This practice is also in line with national legislation and international guidelines on deprivation of liberty. (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’) (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’) JDL-Rule 38 describes how education for child offenders should be organized: ‘Every juvenile of compulsory school age has the right to education suited to his or her needs and abilities and designed to prepare him or her for return to society..’ And JDL-Rule 29 concerns separation of children and adults: ‘In all detention facilities juveniles should be separated from adults, unless they are members of the same family.’ (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’) Also the fact that convicted child offenders between 15 and 18 years are detained in the Institute can be considered as in line with international legislation as it implies that ‘special measures’ apply to all child offenders below the age of 18 years and not only to children between 9 and 15 years old. (§4.6.3.3. ‘Separate Justice for Children System’)

Method: Self Study ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the five quotations (p.35 of Wb-JfC)

“ … In the prisons, in particular, the children complain that the food is not of good quality and lacking in variety. Many of the children contacted complained that they could not eat the food for some days, sometime up to two weeks, due to the bad quality and the monotonous meals of a cup of tea with a piece of bread for breakfast and ‘injera & shirowot’ for dinner and lunch. The bread for breakfast is sometimes distributed the day before and the children usually eat it on that same day when they feel hungry and are left with only a cup of tea for breakfast the next day. Due to the poor quality of the food, it is normal in all prisons to re-make the ‘wot’ delivered by the prison administration adding

ingredients such as onions, oil and spices to make it tastier. This is normally done by detainees who have stayed in the prison for sometime and who have resources at their disposal. Children however have little chance to have such a luxury. As a result, many of them prefer the police station where they have been detained before joining the ordinary prison because they used to get meals from families almost every day. Since they are now very far-off from families and relatives, they have to get used to the food every one hates to eat.” (Report – The African Child Policy Forum)

“ … There is a school from grades 1 through 7, as well as vocational training in woodwork and metal work in the prison. But, the school does not have enough teachers. Because of this, children on remand and those staying in the prison for a few months are not admitted. Only those who have been sentenced for a longer period attend school. The same is true for vocational training.” (Child in Awassa prison)

“ … There is a lot of manual work to be done around and we are always assigned to the most difficult ones. For example, we are assigned to move mud and collect sand from the river. Those who have money can use wheelbarrows, while those who do not have money have to carry the sand in sacs. Though the wet sand is too heavy for us to carry, we do not have any choice other than doing what we are assigned to do. If we fail to work we are punished. All this work is done without payment.” (Child in Ziway prison)

“ … There are more than 106 prisoners in my room, a room not more than fifty square meters. Sleeping space is assigned by measuring with the hands.” (Child in Awassa prison)

“ … I am afraid that since I came here, I have learned many techniques on how to commit crime. In prison I spend the whole day and night with many big guys who have a lot of experience with crime and some of them have even been arrested and released many times.” (Child in Addis Ababa prison)

In practice the Institute has many shortcomings and the principle of ‘rehabilitation and reintegration’ is not ensured. The main problems are:

 Not used as a measure of last resort. (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’)  Not used for the shortest appropriate time. Most accused child offenders stay between two and three months. Convicted child offenders are detained for a maximum period of two years. (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’)  Most children in the Institute are child offenders without parental care, that is street children, abandoned children and/or orphans. (JDL-Rule 4: ‘The Rules should be applied impartially, without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, age, language, religion, nationality, political or other opinion, cultural beliefs or practices, property, birth or family status, ethnic or social origin, and disability.) (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’) (§4.5.2. ‘Non-Discrimination of Children’)

 No segregation of convicted child offenders and alleged child offenders. (Article 110(3) of the Criminal Code. JDL-Rule 17 further provides that ‘Untried detainees should be separated from convicted juveniles’) (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’)  No classification of children according to their age, the type of offence and the frequency of delinquency. (JDL-Rule 28: ‘The detention of juveniles should only take place under conditions that take full account of their particular needs, status and special requirements according to their age, personality, sex and type of offence, as well as mental and physical health.’) (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’)  Use of corporal punishment as a disciplinary measure. (JDL-Rule 67: ‘All disciplinary measures constituting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment shall be strictly prohibited, including corporal punishment, placement in a dark cell, closed or solitary confinement or any other punishment that may compromise the physical or mental health of the juvenile concerned.’) (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’)

Method: Plenary Discussion Objective: Being able to apply national legislation on deprivation of liberty of child offenders in line with international standards Instructions:  Invite a participant to read aloud the instruction of the discussion ‘Education in the Institute’  Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Add necessary information and correct wrong information  Give the participants time to make their notes  Maximum 8 minutes (2 minutes reading + 5 minutes discussion)

Plenary Discussion ‘Education in the Institute’: (p.36 of Wb-JfC)

Please discuss with your colleagues in which judges and prosecutors can contribute to ‘education for child offenders who are deprived of their liberty’ in line with the following international principles: - JDL-Rule 38: ‘Every juvenile of compulsory school age has the right to education suited to his or her needs and abilities and designed to prepare him or her for return to society. Such education should be provided outside the detention facility in community schools wherever possible.’ - JDL-Rule 39: ‘Juveniles above compulsory school age who wish to continue their education should be permitted and encouraged to do so, and every effort should be made to provide them with access to appropriate educational programmes.’ - JDL-Rule 40: ‘Wherever possible, juveniles should be provided with the opportunity to perform remunerated labour, if possible within the local community, as a complement to the vocational training provided in order to enhance the possibility of finding suitable employment when they return to their communities.’

Contributions of judges and prosecutors:

 order compulsory education. However, the capacity of institutions to make such judgement effected and effective is very doubtful.  order that the child may leave the Centre to go to school/vocational training  order that the child may leave the Centre to work as a complement to the vocational training (apprenticeship)

Method: Individual Exercise (Subsequent Plenary Explanation) Objective: Knowing the components of the justice for children process in cases of child offender between 9 and 15 years Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the exercise ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors and Judges’  Motivate the participants to examine the diagrams  Maximum 8 minutes (4 + 4 minutes)

Individual Exercise ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors and Judges’: (p.37 of Wb-JfC)

Please examine the two diagrams concerning the ‘Justice for Children Process‘ at the next two pages (‘Child Offenders of 9 – 15 Years (Non-Serious)’ and ‘Child Offenders of 9 – 15 Years (Serious)’). If there is anything unclear you ask the trainer(s) to clarify.

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 60 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN PROCESS Child Offenders 9-15 Years (Non-Serious)

Police COURT Complainant (Initial Hearing) Parent, etc. (Legal Assistance)

Summon Non-Serious Serious Offence Parents Offence (see separate Diagram) Acquittal Immediate Conviction Investigation Release on Bail to Parents Police (+ Age Determination)

TRIAL (Special Procedures) Acquittal (Legal Assistance) Adjournment Reprimand (Age Determination + Further/Expert Evidence)

CONVICTION (Special Methods of Assessing Sentence)

Measures or Penalties (articles 157-168) + No Capital Punishment

Supervised Corrective Curative Home Fine Education Measures Institute Arrest

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 61 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN PROCESS Child Offenders 9-15 Years (Serious)

Police COURT Complainant, (Initial Hearing + Legal Assistance) Parent, etc.

Serious Offence COURT (having jurisdiction)

Investigation PROSECUTOR Police (+ Age Determination) Frames Charge(s) File Closed

COURT (Trial)

Adjournment Conviction Acquittal (Further/Expert Evidence)

Sentencing (Measures/Penalties) + No Capital Punishment

Imprisonment Corrective Curative Measures Institution

Method: Subsequent Plenary Explanation ( 5 minutes)  Answer/discuss the questions raised by the participants  If there are no questions, you continue with the next section

6.6.3. Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offenders Cases (15 to 18 years) (p.40 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 66 minutes Objective: Knowing the responsibilities of judges in cases of child offender between 15 and 18 years Being aware of the problems child offenders between 15 and 18 years face at the court level Being aware of the problems judges face in cases of child offender between 15 and 18 years Being able to find possible solutions for problems in cases of child offender between 15 and 18 years Being able to treat child offenders between 15 and 18 years in a child- sensitive manner Methods: Explanation + Self Study + Plenary Discussion + Small Group Demonstration (+ Subsequent Plenary Demonstration) + Read Aloud + Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion) Aids:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years’  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’  Handout ‘JfC Process – Child Offenders - 15 – 18 years’  Annex 9 ‘Real Life Story of Demeke’

Method: Explanation ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years‘  Uncover responsibility 1 on the overhead

Child offenders between 15 and 18 years old are considered adults and are dealt with by ordinary courts. Article 56(1) of the Criminal Code (2004) states: ‘If at the time of the commission of the crime the criminal was over fifteen but under eighteen years of age, he shall be tried under the ordinary provisions of this Code.’

Since judges who deal with these kind of cases are bound by the provisions of the criminal law that provide for the treatment of child offenders between 15 and 18 year of age under the ordinary provisions and procedures, the crucial stage in the justice for children process for their intervention appears to be at the stage of judgment. At that stage judges have the following six responsibilities:

(1) Judges should take into account ‘the circumstances of the case, in particular the age of the criminal, his incorrigible and dangerous disposition and the  likelihood of his reform’ when assessing the sentence. Article 56(2) of the Criminal Code (2004) provides judges with two options:  ‘applying the general provisions regarding ordinary mitigation of penalties’ (article 179 of the Criminal Code (2004))  ‘ applying one of the special penalties specified for young persons‘(article 166 to 168 of the Criminal Code (2004))

Method: Explanation ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years‘  Uncover responsibility 2, 3 and 4 on the overhead while explaining

(2) Judges should consider factors for mitigating the penalty as per article 56(2) of the Criminal Code (2004). Article 179 of the Criminal Code (2004) provides  for ordinary mitigation.

(3) Judges should take a measure or penalty as per article 54 of the Criminal  Code (2004).

(4) Judges should use their discretionary power and apply ‘special penalties’ whenever possible and the circumstances justify in cases of child offenders  between 15 and 18 years old (article 166 to 168 of the Criminal Code (2004)). These ‘special penalties’ are: (§6.6.2.3. ‘Stage of Judgment’)  fine in case where they are capable of paying.  imprisonment in case of a serious offence: . in a corrective institution (§6.6.2.4. ‘Addis Ababa City Administration Institute for the Rehabilitation of Juvenile Delinquents’) . in a penitentiary detention institution where the principle of separation between children and adults shall be applied (article 110(2) of the Criminal Code (2004)). The court shall determine the period of imprisonment according to the gravity of the act committed and taking into account the age of the child at the time of the crime (article 168(2) of the Criminal Code (2004)). The period of detention shall however be not less than one year and may extend to a period of ten years. In the carrying out of penalties entailing loss of liberty the rule of segregation until majority shall be strictly observed (article 36(5) of the Constitution).

International legislation states that deprivation of liberty of child offenders should be avoided as much as possible (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’) and promotes community-based measures and especially diversion for all child offenders below 18 years old. (§4.6.3.1. ‘Special Treatment during All Stages’)(§4.6.3.5. ‘Special Measures’)(§4.6.3.6. ‘Diversion’)

In actual practice judges apply special penalties in the case of child offenders above 15 and below 18 years of age.

Judges should apply ‘special penalties’ whenever possible and the circumstances  so justify.

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years‘  Uncover responsibility 5 on the overhead

(5) Judges should make sure that capital punishment is not imposed on convicted child offenders (article 176 of the Criminal Code (2004)). The Criminal Code  (2004) however, does not have specific article prohibiting life imprisonment without the possibility of release for this age group.

Method: Self Study ( 1 minute) Instructions:  Invite the participants to read the international legislation (p.10 of Wb-JfC)

International legislation prohibits both capital punishment and life imprisonment. (§4.6.2.2. ‘Prohibition of Capital Punishment and Life Imprisonment’)

Judges should ensure that capital punishment is not imposed on child offenders . They should also avoid imposing life imprisonment without the possibility of  release . Method: Explanation ( 4 minutes) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges - Child Offenders – 15 to 18 Years‘  Uncover responsibility 6 on the overhead

(6) Judges, instead of mitigating the ordinary penalty, should send, by stating the reason therefore, child offenders between 15 and 18 years to a curative or  corrective institution in the event where:-  the child’s physical or mental development is considered to be that of child below the age of fifteen;  where the child did not commit a serious crime;  according to expert opinion, the young criminal appears to be amenable to curative, educational or corrective measures

Background Note for Trainers – Curative and Corrective Institutions: Sending a child offender to a ‘curative or corrective institution’ is not exclusively limited to the ‘Ammanuel Mental Hospital’ (curative) or the ‘AA City Administration Institute for the Rehabilitation of Juvenile Offenders’ (corrective). The child offender can also be send to a metal medical care centre that provides psychiatric treatment or to a Community Based Diversion Centre.

International legislation states that deprivation of liberty of child offenders should be avoided as much as possible (§4.6.2.3. ‘Guarantees for Deprivation of Liberty’) and where deprivation of liberty is unavoidable, judges should follow the detailed minimum standards for the treatment of detained children. (§4.4.2 ‘JDL’s Rules (1990)’)

As stated above, judges do normally apply, where appropriate, the special measures and penalties specified for child offenders (9 – 15 years of age) in cases of child offenders aged between 15 and 18.

Method: Plenary Discussion Objective: Being aware of the problems children face at the court level Being aware of the problems judges/prosecutors face in child offenders cases (15 to 18 years) Being able to find possible solutions for problems in child offender cases (15 to 18 years) Instructions:  Overhead ‘Responsibilities of Judges in Child Offender Cases (15 – 18 year)’  Show and point out the responsibilities while discussing  Read aloud the first question of the discussion ‘Problems Faced by Children and Judges’  Read aloud the second question of the discussion  Read aloud the third question of the discussion

 Guide the discussion and try to involve all participants  Add necessary information/examples and correct wrong information  Formulate main ideas/ conclusions  Maximum 15 minutes (5 + 5 + 5 minutes)

Plenary Discussion ‘Problems Faced by Children and Prosecutors’: (p.42 of Wb-JfC)

1. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for the children if judges do not take their responsibilities in cases of child offenders between 15 and 18 years.  Children may not be able to contact their parents  They might be denied their right to bail release  The child may not be provided with legal assistance  The child’s parents/relatives/guardians may not available during the hearing  The hearing may not be conducted in an informal manner, thereby traumatizing the child  The child may be detained with adult offenders  The child may be sentenced to capital punishment or life imprisonment

2. Discuss with your colleagues what might be the consequences for your work as prosecutors if judges do not take their responsibilities cases of child offenders between 15 and 18 yeas.  - (Prosecutors are involved only in very limited cases)

3. Discuss possible solutions:  Aware the judges on their responsibilities pertaining to child offenders between 15 – 18 years of age  Participating in ‘Training on Justice for Children’

Method: Small Group Demonstration Objective: Being able to treat child offenders in a child-sensitive manner Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the demonstration ‘Taking the Child’s View into Account’  Compose small groups of 4 to 6 persons  Motivate the participants to start their preparation  Maximum 8 minutes (preparation)

Small Group Demonstration ‘Taking the Child’s View into Account’: (p.42 of Wb-JfC)

For this exercise we use the case of Demeke again, but we assume that Demeke is 16 years old. You are aware of the international guideline ‘respect for the child’s views’ (article 12(1) of the CRC) and the specific component of ‘opportunity to be heard’ (article 12(2) of the CRC). (§4.5.5. ‘Right to Participate’) Please discuss with your colleagues how you as the judge in Demeke’s case can respect the child’s views and can give him the opportunity to

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 67 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors participate during the various stages of the judicial process. Afterwards the trainer will invite some of you to demonstrate the conversation. One of you will be the judge and the other will be Demeke.

Child-sensitive conversation:  Make sure the participants prepare a concrete conversation with Demeke!  Demeke are you aware of why you are at the court? Please tell me how long you have stayed at the police station and whether the police have informed you of your right to legal and other assistance during investigation. Did the police talk with you about your ‘right to release on bail’? Demeke, please know also that you have the right to freely and fearlessly express your views concerning the charge against you here in the court? You may say whatever you think is necessary and important for me to know. Is that okay for you, Demeke?

Method: Subsequent Plenary Demonstration ( 15 minutes) Instructions:  Invite one group to demonstrate ‘Taking the Child’s View into Account’’’  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Taking the Child’s View into Account’’ ‘  Discuss the child-sensitive skills of both demonstrations  Flipchart ‘Child-Sensitive Skills in Child Offenders Cases’  Write down at least 5 concrete (!) child-sensitive skills on the flipchart  Discuss 2 or 3 possible improvements  Write down the improvements on the whiteboard (not on the flipchart!)  Maximum 10 minutes for the 2 demonstrations and subsequent discussion  Invite another group to demonstrate ‘Taking the Child’s View into Account’’’’ and to include 2 or 3 improvements  Check if the improvements were included  Maximum 5 minutes for the demonstration and subsequent discussion

Method: Individual Exercise (+ Subsequent Plenary Explanation) Objective: Knowing the components of the justice for children process in cases of child offenders between 15 and 18 years Instructions:  Read aloud the instruction of the exercise ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors and Judges’  Motivate the participants to do the exercise  Maximum 4 minutes (examination)

Individual Exercise ‘Responsibilities of Prosecutors and Judges’: (p.43 of Wb-JfC)

Please examine the diagram concerning the ‘Justice for Children Process‘ (‘Child Offenders of 15 – 18 Years’) attentively. Discuss the components of the ‘Justice for Children Process’ that are not clear to you or you do not agree with.

JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN PROCESS Child Offenders 15 - 18 Years

Investigation PROSECUTOR Police

Frame Charge(s) File Closed

COURT (Trial)

Conviction Adjournment Acquittal

Sentencing (Further/Expert Evidence)

Ordinary Provisions Penalties (No Capital Punishment) (articles 166-168)

Method: Subsequent Plenary Explanation ( 5 minutes)  Answer/discuss the questions raised by the participants  If there are no questions, you continue with the next section

6.6.4.The Child Friendly Bench in Addis Ababa (p.43 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 5 minutes Objective: Knowing the differences between the practice of the ordinary courts and the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ Methods: Explanation + Read Aloud Aids: -

Only a very small minority of the child offenders is dealt with by a specialized court, that is the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ in Addis Ababa (CFB). The main differences in actual practice between the ordinary courts and the ‘Child Friendly Bench’ are:  the proceedings are held in an informal and child-sensitive manner  the judges at the CFB have a better orientation of the laws pertaining to child offenders there are social workers, psychologists and lawyers at the CFB who provide psycho-social and legal assistance to child offenders  judges make use of social inquiry report before they give their decision.

Judges should apply national legislation properly and should be proactive in implementing innovative principles and good practices developed by colleagues in  justice for children in the country as well as abraod.

6.7. Test Yourself! (p.45 of Wb-JfC)

Time: 12 minutes Objective: Checking if the formulated knowledge, skills and attitudes are acquired (= §6.1. learning objectives) Methods: Explanation + Individual Test (+ Subsequent Plenary Discussion at the request of the participants) Aids:  Flipchart ‘Parking Lot’

Method: Explanation ( 2 minutes) Instructions:  Flipchart ‘Parking Lot’  Check if there is any question concerning this chapter left on the ‘Parking Lot’ (if so, you discuss/answer)

Method: Individual Test Instructions:  Remind the participants that each chapter ends with the section ‘Test Yourself!’  Remind the participants that it is an individual exercise ‘to find out for yourself if you have learned what you were supposed to learn’ (= evaluation of the learning objectives)  Remind the participants that you don’t discuss the questions/answers afterwards, except if something is unclear/unknown  Inform the participants when 2 minutes are left  Maximum 10 minutes

You are at the end of the sixth chapter of this Workbook. That means that it is time to return to the learning objectives we have formulated at the beginning of this chapter!

 Explain in your own words the main difference between ordinary police, judges and prosecutors on the one hand, and specialized police, judges and prosecutors on the other.  Specialized police, judges and prosecutors have received (some form of) training in justice for children and/or children's rights and/or have experience with justice for children and/or children's rights because they work at a specialized 'Child Protection Units' (police), specialized Centre for the Investigation and Prosecution of Violence against Women and Children established at the Federal First Instance Courts in Addis Ababa (prosecutors) or specialized Victim Friendly Benches' or ‘Child Friendly Bench’ (judges).  Explain how judges and prosecutors can ensure that child offenders are not secondarily traumatized by the justice for children system.  Explaining every step of the justice for children process in child-appropriate language; treating all child offenders under the age of 18 years as children; applying the special procedures and special measures to all child-offenders; not criminalizing ‘status-offences’; taking community-based measures; guaranteeing that alleged child-offenders are not secondary victimized by the justice system in general and police and prosecutors in particular.  Give at least three reasons why sending a child offender to the ‘Rehabilitation Institute’ is not in line with international principles and/or best practices developed in the country and abroad.  no love and care of parents/family  no (appropriate) education  no (appropriate) health care  Do you have any question about ‘child offenders and justice for children’ or any other discussed subject? If so, ask the trainer or a colleague!  Indicate on the scale from 0 to 10 to what extent your knowledge, skills and attitudes regarding ‘children, childhood and child development’ have improved. First you indicate your initial knowledge, skills and attitudes, i.e. before you started this chapter, by encircling the right number. Then you indicate your current knowledge, skills and attitudes, i.e. now you are at the end of this chapter, by encircling the right number.

Knowledge 0 -- 1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 6 -- 7 -- 8 –- 9 -- 10 Skills 0 -- 1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 6 -- 7 -- 8 –- 9 -- 10 Attitudes 0 -- 1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 6 -- 7 -- 8 –- 9 -- 10

MY  PERSONAL NOTES: (p.46 of Wb-JfC)

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 72 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors PROFESSIONALS INVOLVED IN CHILD OFFENDER CASES

Children below 9 years of age:

- No police involved - No judges involved - No prosecutors involved

Child offenders between 9 and 15 years who are alleged of having or have committed a minor offence:

- Ordinary police or specialized police involved ('Child Protection Units' ('CPUs)) - Ordinary judges or specialized judges involved (‘Child Friendly Bench’ (CFB)) wherever it exists

Child offenders between 9 and 15 years who are alleged of having or have committed a serious offence:

- Ordinary police or specialized police involved ('Child Protection Units' (CPUs)) - Ordinary judges or specialized judges involved (‘Child Friendly Bench’ (CFB)) wherever it exists - Ordinary prosecutors involved

Child offenders between 15 and 18 years who are alleged of having or have committed an offence:

- Ordinary police involved - Ordinary judges involved - Ordinary prosecutors involved

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE POLICE IN CHILD OFFENDER CASES

Ordinary Police (child offenders 9 – 18 years):

1. Taking the child offender to the nearest court 2. Taking the child offender to a hospital for age determination 3. Release the child offender on bail 4. Investigation of the case 5. Moral Duties

CPUs in Addis Ababa (child offenders 9 – 15 years):

Serious Offence Police take the child offender and/or immediately to the ordinary court Recidivist or CFB where it exists (law)

Minor/Petty CPU-police divert the case to Offence and ‘Community-Based Correction First Time Programme’ after consulting the Offender child’s parents or guardian (actual practice)

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 74 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors IT IS EITHER THE DUTY OF JUDGES OR OF PROSECUTORS TO ENSURE THAT CHILD OFFENDERS ARE TREATED IN A CHILD-SENSITIVE MANNER BY THE POLICE!

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 75 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors ALSO PROSECUTORS WHO ARE NOT TRAINED IN ‘JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN’ CAN TREAT CHILD OFFENDERS IN A CHILD-SENSITIVE MANNER!

DISAGREE

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 78 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors RESPONSIBILITIES OF PROSECUTORS IN CHILD OFFENDER CASES

(1) Supervise the police

(2) Frame the charge

(3) Follow up the court proceedings

(4) Moral duties

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 79 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors RESPONSIBILITIES OF JUDGES CHILD OFFENDERS BETWEEN 9 TO 15 YEARS

At the stage of institution of the proceedings:

(1) verify the identity, age and trade of the child offender (2) ask to state the particulars (3) summon the child’s parent(s) (4) instruct the police to the manner of investigation (5) direct the public prosecutor to frame a charge (6) hand over the child offender to his/her parents

At the stage of hearing: (1) held proceedings in closed sessions (2) held proceedings in an informal manner (3) appoint an advocate

At the stage of judgement: (1) acquit and set free children who are not guilty (2) impose the appropriate measure or penalty (3) assess the measure or penalty based on the Social Inquiry Report (4) warn, admonish or blame parents (5) vary/modify the measure or penalty (6) no publication of judgement

(1) Take into account the circumstances of the case (2) Consider factors for mitigating the penalty (3) Assess the measure or penalty (4) Apply special penalties (5) Make sure that neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment is imposed (6) Send child offenders to a curative or corrective institution

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 82 of 83 In-Service Training for Judges & Prosecutors CHILD-SENSITIVE SKILLS IN CHILD OFFENDER CASES

 …

Trainers Manual - Workbook for Judges & Prosecutors – Chapter 6 ‘Justice for Child Offenders’ Page 83 of 83