It is strongly felt that the best institutions that could try child or juvenile offenders need to be Juvenile Courts, and not adult Courts. This is because of the two principal reasons:
2. At their tender age, what is more important is the ability of the system to take correctional and rehabilitative measures to bring the offender back into the mainstream in order to do productive and useful work in future. By incarcerating the child to jail sentences, their future lives are spoiled and even after their sentences are completed, it may be too late to being them back into the mainstream of social life, and thus, later, they would prove burdens for themselves and society and may indulge in large-scale criminal activities due to non-correctional measures.
Children and juveniles are not in a position to offer strong defense in adult courts of law because of their cognitive disabilities and other limitations because of which their position would be marginalized in adult Courts and they would not be in a position to defend themselves as well as they could possibly be able to do in Juvenile Courts, which would need to take more compassionate perspective of their crimes and misdemeours and pass judgments, based on individual characteristics of the crime and perceived 'child criminal.
The aspect of children being tried in adult Courts is a social problem and s ...