1. Purposes and research methods
This study examined how child delinquents (offenders younger than 13 years
of age) are handled at each stage of the criminal justice procedures, for example,
the police, the court, and protective dispositions as well as the current status
of cooperation with the local community to deal with issues related to them.
Based on findings, it suggests effective measures for preventing those very young
delinquents from recommitting offenses and supporting pro-social development
of them.

To this end, first, this study analyzed official statistical data to understand the
trend and current status of treatment of child delinquents. Specifically, it looked
into data of the police to get insight into the trend of child delinquents who
were sent to the juvenile department. At the same time, it reviewed data of juvenile
protective dispositions decided by the court and the internal data of the Ministry
of Justice on the status of child delinquent who were entered probation or sent
to youth detention centers.

Second, this study collected opinions and advice of professionals working at
stages of juvenile justice system, such as, law enforcement (the police), decisions
by the court (judges, juvenile investigators, workers at ‘Youth Dream Up Centers’,
members of the Juvenile Classification Review center) and dispositions (probation
officers, child welfare facility workers, teachers at juvenile detention centers).
It also inspected opinions of practitioners on the treatment of child delinquents
at each stage of delinquency case processing, the status of cooperation with local
communities, and improvement measures. Lastly, it interviewed and asked
opinions of community-based practitioners on improvement measures for
handling these very young offenders at the community level.

Third, in-depth interviews were carried out on not only child delinquents but
also their guardians to get information on their experiences and attitude
associated with the juvenile justice system. Considering access to child
delinquents, survey was conducted on those on probation or inmates of a juvenile
reformatory. The in-depth interviews were carried out on child delinquents on
probation or with juvenile justice system experience, such as being investigated
by the police or tried by the juvenile court at the age of between 10 and 12
years, and their parents or guardians.

2. Treatment of child delinquents in criminal justice process and
the current status of cooperation with local communities
This paper looked into treatment of child delinquents by the police.
Investigation into cases involving those very young offenders are classified into
two; the content of investigation and investigation methods. Regarding to contents
of investigation, criminal investigation into child delinquents generally begins with
the environment survey like other older juvenile delinquents. The environment
survey mainly focuses on their personal characteristics or behavior. The younger
a child delinquent is, the more it is important to understand environmental factors
surrounding him or her. For this reason, it would be necessary to conduct family
or educational environmental survey in consideration of their characteristics. Risk
assessment is conducted with the consent of the child delinquent himself or
herself and their legal guardians. The weakness of the survey is that it would
be difficult for young children to answer certain questions due to the fact that
the questionnaire is generally focused on youth and the number of questions
is so many (344 questions).

In this regard, depending on the police station, the shortened question form
(136 questions) is used, however, the shortened version only contains less number
of questions. It is needed to develop new survey which suitable for the level
of understanding and mental development of young child delinquents. As for the
method of investigation, the investigation is conducted in the presence of a
guardian, but a professional or an expert with a guardian will need to participate
in the investigation of very young offenders to help them understand the
investigation process and feel psychological stability.

When it comes to the disciplinary program carried out at the police level,
some of those child delinquents had to attend the disciplinary program with
juveniles (over 13 but less than 19 years of age) as the number of young child
offender is relatively small or they only got personal counseling. Some police
stations carried out a part of the disciplinary program only for child delinquents
while most of them did not run the disciplinary program for them separately.
Restorative police activities have been conducted by the police since 2019.
According to the police officer in charge of managing restorative police activities
answered that child delinquents were prioritized. The police replied that
restorative police activities with external experts are aimed at helping child
delinquents to recover relationships with their families and surroundings as well
as preventing them from reoffending. Their parents and legal guardians showed
high level of satisfaction for those activities.

Third, when looking at the opinions of child delinquents and their guardians
on the treatment at the police level, most of those young offenders and guardians
showed a positive attitude and said that the police treated them well. Only handful
of respondents said that child delinquents were scared of police officers, so they
were daunted and could not answer properly. About the attitudes of those child
delinquents toward the police, large number of respondents said that they were
scared, which showed that regardless of the attitude of police officers to them,
their first experience of being questioned by the police made them feel scared.
In other words, it implied that police investigations might be scary from the
perspective of very young children.

Regarding the content of investigation, those very young delinquent felt difficult
understanding what the police officer asked and said. For example, child
delinquents, who underwent risk assessment, answered that it would be better
to explain the meaning of the words in the risk assessment. This could be said
that words and contents of questions that would be understandable by those young
offenders. Regarding the disciplinary program by the police, some said that it
would be helpful for them while others did not. Among those who answered
the disciplinary program was helpful, two children attended the program together
even though the program was provided individually. Those attendees also
answered that they shared necessary information. This showed that an individual
approach might be effective.

Next is how the court handles child delinquents.
First, the investigation by the court included pre-disposition education,
education by juvenile investigators, expert assessment and counseling, and
investigation by the Youth Dream Up Center and the probation office. Among
them, pre-disposition education and education by juvenile investigators were
provided by juvenile investigators, and those education programs were mainly
targeting at child delinquents. Pre-disposition education was provided for
guardians and child delinquents for whom none protective disposition order or
Disposition No.1 (to consign a juvenile concerned of the care and custody of
his/her guardian or any person who can provide protection for the juvenile in
substitution for the guardian) was expected as a possible decision of the court.
The education was about juvenile justice procedures and understanding of
adolescence. With this education, they could learn about juvenile justice and,
for guardians, it would be helpful in raising children. However, it is also necessary
to provide information about counseling or support organizations to guardians
where they could get help even after the education program.

Investigation by the juvenile investigator was also carried out into child
delinquents and their guardians. Juvenile investigators, who majored in juvenile
related fields, investigated cases considering characteristics of child delinquents
and provided education and counseling for those children as well as their
guardian. Investigation by the juvenile investigators could help to understand
environmental factors such as family backgrounds as well as child delinquents
themselves and to take appropriate dispositions based on findings. However,
considering shortage of juvenile investigators, only small number of child
delinquents were investigated by them. In addition, if a child delinquent had an
emotional problem, or he or she was suspected an intellectual or developmental
disability, he or she was required to get professional diagnosis or counseling.

In-court counseling was generally provided 12 times within 3 months, and in
the case of child delinquents, this was used to improve their behavior and
inclination of act. Under the current juvenile law, the order to attend a program
was rendered to juveniles over the age of 12, most child delinquents between
10 to 11 years old were not the subject of the order. Taking account into the
current law, positive changes for children and guardians were being pursued
through counseling with strong educational purposes for those very young
offenders. Furthermore, counseling by the Dream Up Center was conducted for
3 days, and some centers had developed and operated designated programs for
elementary school students.

Findings of pre-disposition investigations by the probation office on child
delinquents were usually referred by judges, but in certain cases they were not
used at all. Unlike the police, investigations by the court were conducted on
not only child delinquents but also their guardians. One of advantages of
investigation by the court was that it helps in-depth grasp of environmental
factors and customized counseling. In line with investigation, education was
provided. However, there were limitations of pre-disposition investigation by the
court that only small number of child delinquents were covered due to difficulties
in finding and linking with juvenile investigators or experts. Lack of financial
support was also another problem.

Second, when it comes to temporary measures, few cases of child delinquents
were entrusted to the juvenile classification review center. Judges said that in
principle, child delinquents would not be sent to the juvenile classification review
center. Those delinquents with no certain dwelling, however, were entrusted to
the center. The consignment of a classification reviewer could have positive
effects in that it enabled detailed diagnosis and disposition through in-depth
investigation and education on those child delinquents for a certain period of
time. Using classification reviewer also could lead to improvement of attitudes
and behaviors through education during the period. However, for child
delinquents, what pointed out as problems were restriction of freedom caused
by being accommodated in juvenile facilities, psychological instability due to
moving to a facility far from the place where they lived, and the fact that they
were not separated from older juveniles. On the other hand, some child
delinquents are entrusted to shelters rather than the juvenile classification center,
but child delinquents were rarely sent to shelters. Against this backdrop, it would
be necessary to find and link community resources that could temporarily take
care of those child delinquents.

Third, the opinions of child delinquents and guardians on treatment by the
court were as follows. First, regarding the investigation, the very young offenders
and their guardians showed positive stance on investigation by the juvenile
investigator. They answered that the juvenile investigator paid attention to what
they said, explained well, and selected right words that those young delinquent
could understand. They also answered positively to counseling by Youth Dream
Up Center. However, some said that it would be desirable to inform in detail
about the psychology of elementary school children who were not adolescents
and what could do and should not do at that age.

Next, opinions on the experience of entrusting classification auditors were
examined. First of all, only one child delinquent positively responded to entrusting
to the juvenile classification review center. The respondent explained that
personality education provided by the center was helpful. Others pointed out
problems of entrusting to the center, such as restriction of freedom, regular life,
and long referral period. For juveniles with experience of being entrusted to the
classification reviewers at a very young age or adolescence, what were good for
them were education, treatment, meeting with older juveniles, and relationships
with teachers. On the other hand, they answered what were hard for them were
cut off from outside, regular life, and relationship with others in the facility and
teachers. In particular, it was found that adaptation to new environment would
tough for juveniles at the middle school age.

Considering these findings, it would be needed to diversify temporary measures
for child delinquents. Furthermore, taking into account the importance of early
education, it was needed to provide education and treatment appropriate to the
level and characteristics of children's development at the classification. Lastly,
about the trial, most of the child delinquents said they were afraid of being tried
in court. Even some of their guardians answered that it was a terrified experience
to attend the court with their children. Some juveniles also answered that they
were so scared to attend court for the first time at the very young age, however,
they were accustomed to being tried and no more being afraid as hearings
continued.

As to whether they understood the content of the disposition by the court
at the time of the trial, not only child delinquents but their guardians did not
well know it. Regarding the disposition by the court, many respondents said that
it would be helpful to explain what the disposition meant. Meanwhile, those,
who had experience of being entrusted to the juvenile classification review center,
or knew other juveniles delinquents, were aware of the disposition.
Protective disposition on child delinquents could be summarized as follows.
First, in majority cases, disposition no.1 (no physical transfer) was rendered
by the court. According to juvenile court judges, if the offense was minor or
the guardian showed willingness to take care of the child delinquent concerned,
treatment of child delinquents was entrusted to the guardian. If the child
delinquent was so young and his or her guardian was trustworthy, the court tended
to render disposition no.1. When the court determined that the guardian would
not be able to properly take care of the child delinquent, they were usually
entrusted to juvenile facilities or institutions to take care of, supervise and protect,
and educate them. In fact, physical transfer was rarely rendered by the court
as there were not enough facilities to take care of those delinquents (for shelters,
only juveniles at certain ages could stay).

Second, as the order to attend programs was for juvenile delinquents above
12 years of age or older, it was rarely decided for younger ones. Judges answered
that when ordering to attend programs for child delinquents, it might be more
appropriate to take an individual customized approach and provide by local
community organizations.

Third, for probation, since 2016, around 100 child delinquents less than 12
years of age had been ordered. As of August, 2020, when the survey was
conducted, 19 elementary school students were received probation order. In fact,
there was no specific guideline on probation of child delinquents. Frontline
workers and professionals in the field of juvenile delinquency pointed out
necessary measures for probation of children such as selecting easy words to
help them understand, questions of their ordinary life (inquiries about friend for
juveniles in middle or high school ages), more counseling with their guardians.

They also recommended guardians to accompany child delinquents when they
attend probation office so that they could ensure safety of those child delinquents
and understand what they felt and what their problems were. Those workers and
professionals said that it would be better to visit in person those delinquents
to know their problems and assess them correctly. To promote effectiveness of
probation for child delinquents, it would need to strengthen professional training
on characteristics of children and face-to-face talk skill. In line with that,
information on local or community resources they could use should be provided.

Fourth, 27 elementary school children were entrusted to a child welfare
institution for the care and custody, as of the end of 2019 following the court
order of disposition no.6. Workers at child welfare institutions said that no rooms
were allotted only for child delinquents or no special programs for them. However,
they said that classes were arranged according to the individual educational level
for curriculum education. They suggested alternative facilities for those child
delinquents considering their age and characteristics.

Fifth, with regard to transferring a juvenile to the Juvenile Reformatory, 4 child
delinquents (under 12 years old) were entrusted to a hospital, a sanatorium or
a juvenile medical care and protection institution, as of August, 2020. According
to a practitioners, the juvenile medical care and protection institution operated
programs based on their intelligence level. They pointed out that it would be
necessary to provide separate education programs for young child delinquents
and those programs should be designed considering their developmental stages.
Looking at the status of disposition no.8 to no.10 for child delinquents, from
2015 to September 2020, the number of children got disposition no. 8, no. 9,
and no. 10 were two, three and one respectively. As the statistical data were
about children under the age of 12, the age group of middle school students
might be included. Therefore, it could be said that it was extremely rare to transfer
child delinquents, who were subject to this study, to the Juvenile Reformatory.
It was true that juvenile reformatories had no separate programs, education, or
facilities for very young offenders because it was unusual to transfer the young
offender to those facilities.

Sixth, when it comes to education for guardians, it could be provided through
pre-disposition education when child delinquents concerned received no
protective disposition or disposition no.1. For other dispositions, education for
guardians was often provided by institutions in charge of enforcing dispositions
in line with education for delinquents. Judges explained that the younger the
child delinquents were, the more order to education for guardian were decided.
Seventh, child delinquents and guardians said that disposition helped them to
face and deal with problems of those children. However, when those child
delinquents concerned did not understand the consequences (dispositions) of their
actions at a young age, they were emotionally hurt during going through criminal
justice proceedings. When it comes to education for parents or guardians,
education on parenting or child rearing, or grasping typical behaviors of children
was helpful. They added that education programs focusing on characteristics of
young children should be provided.

Lastly, the status of cooperation between criminal justice agencies and the local
community and treatment in the local community were examined. At the police
stage, systematic resource linkage was carried out in relation to investigation
with experts and disciplinary programs. In particular, if child abuse was suspected
or financial support or counseling deemed necessary, children concerned were
linked to related institutions. At the court stage, local community resources were
used in the investigation process (expert assessment or counseling), and efforts
were made to find and link resources that could take temporary measures for
child delinquents.

Nonetheless, welfare intervention was not actively provided. In the disposition
stage, when disposition no.1 was rendered, resources to transfer child delinquents
were used while institutions in community were utilized so as to enforce the
order to attend programs. With regard to probation, special crime prevention
committee or connection to counseling were used.

In terms of treatment in the local community, integrated support for child
delinquents was provided through Dream Start (for vulnerable groups under 12
years old) and youth safety nets (9 to 24 years old). However, in the former case,
if subject child delinquent satisfied the conditions of the vulnerable group, they
could receive support, while in the latter case, they were linked to institutions
not for young children but for juveniles, which was pointed out as limitations.
Besides those kind of support, consignment for protection, mental health support,
or counseling services were provided at the local community level. The problem,
however, was that only small number of child delinquent were able to receive
support and at the same time active links with criminal justice agencies had not
been established.

3. Policy suggestions
Possible improvement measures for treatment at the police stage in criminal
justice procedures are as follows.
First, for improvement measures at the investigation stage, what needed are
development of an investigation tool that considers the characteristics of child
delinquents, uation of the developmental characteristics of them and
connection with experts for this purpose, and development of delinquency risk
assessment of child delinquents questionnaire considering their comprehension
level of vocabulary. Moreover, it is required to check out whether child abuse
is suspected, if so, proper intervention should be made.

Second, improvement measures related to treatment include the development
of a response manual that considers the characteristics of child delinquents
(regardless of the fact that they are victims or offenders), revitalization of
disciplinary programs and counseling for them as well as their guardians,
promotion of restorative judicial programs, and active use of school police
officers. It is also recommended to strengthen resource linkage, systematic linkage
and cooperation between the police and related organizations, and education
and training for police.

Next, is about treatment at the court stage. First, suggestions are visiting in
person to child delinquents in connection with the investigation, providing
information to guardians during pre-disposal education, education of juvenile
investigators and expansion of manpower, and utilization of expert case meetings.
Second, to improve treatment at the court stage, what needed is to discover
resources in community which could be used for temporary treatment and to
actively use assistance in the trial stage from a welfare point of view.

Finally, as for improvement measures at the disposal stage, first, for
consignment of child delinquent to a guardian as a disposition no.1, it is required
to provide information on local community resources that can be helpful during
the consignment period, to assign consignment protection committee for child
delinquents whose guardians are not able to provide proper protection and to
figure out and link resources to transfer their custody. Second is early education
for child delinquents. To this end, the subject ages of order to attend programs
should be lowered. Third, development of probation methods should take into
account the characteristics and development stages of the very young offenders.
Fourth, those child delinquents should be placed to a child welfare institutions
or juvenile protection institution near their home by making those institutions
smaller in size. Last suggestion is to develop various caregiver education programs
that specialize in the needs of individual caregivers.

Besides, recommendations include measures to enhance cooperation with the
local community at the police, court, and disposition stage and to improve
treatment in the local community.