skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 64551 Find in a Library
Title: CHILDREN'S TRIBUNALS - A COMPARISON OF SEVERAL COUNTRIES
Journal: CRIME AND/ET JUSTICE  Volume:6  Issue:4  Dated:(1978)  Pages:220-227
Author(s): J HACKLER; L BIRON
Corporate Author: University of Ottawa Press
Canada
Date Published: 1978
Page Count: 8
Sponsoring Agency: University of Ottawa Press
Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada
Type: Survey (Cross-Cultural)
Format: Article
Language: French
Country: Canada
Annotation: THE PROBLEMS OF CROSSCULTURAL STUDY ARE EMPHASIZED, AND THE TYPES OF CHILDREN'S COURTS, THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT PERSONNEL, AND THE ROLES OF INFORMAL CONTACTS ARE COMPARED FOR SEVERAL COUNTRIES.
Abstract: NO GUIDELINES CONCERNING CROSSCULTURAL STUDIES OF CHILDREN'S COURTS EXIST, AND THREE ASPECTS OF COMPARATIVE RESEARCH ARE FREQUENTLY NEGLECTED. FIRST, TYPOLOGIES OF CHILDREN'S TRIBUNALS WHICH TAKE THE INTERNATIONAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE LEGAL SYSTEMS INTO ACCOUNT ARE STILL LACKING. IN THIS RESPECT, A STUDY OF THE FUNCTIONING OF CHILDREN'S COURTS REVEALS TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMMUNICATION: IN THE VERTICAL NETWORK OF COMMUNICATION, DISCUSSION AND EXCHANGE OF IDEAS GOES ON BETWEEN PERSONS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS (E.G., BETWEEN JUDGE, PROBATION OFFICER, AND POLICE OFFICER) WHILE IN THE HORIZONTAL TYPE, INFORMATION IS SHARED WITHIN A SINGLE ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT (E.G., AMONG PROBATION OFFICERS) BUT NOT BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS. ALTHOUGH THIS TYPOLOGY HELD TRUE FOR CHILDREN'S COURTS IN PARIS, VIENNA, BOSTON, EDMONTON, AND MONTREAL, METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS CONTINUE TO EXIST. FOR INSTANCE, THE TYPOLOGY DOES NOT ACCOUNT FOR REGIONAL OR INDIVIDUAL COURT VARIATIONS WITHIN A PARTICULAR COUNTRY. SECOND, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE TRADITIONAL ROLES OF THE COURT PERSONNEL (E.G., OF THE JUDGE OR THE PROSECUTOR) LEADS TO ERRONEOUS RESULTS SINCE THESE ROLES DO NOT CORRESPOND TO EACH OTHER WITHIN DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. A MORE PROMISING APPROACH COMPARING THE FUNCTIONS OF COURT PERSONNEL INDICATES THAT THE PROSECUTOR OF THE CROWN IN VANCOVER FULFILLS MUCH THE SAME FUNCTION OF PRESENTING THE CASE AS THE JUDGE DOES IN PARIS. THIRD, LESSER MEMBERS OF THE COURTS WHO CARRY ON IMPORTANT INFORMAL CONTACTS WITH THE CLIENTS AND THUS FULFILL A VITAL FUNCTION WITHIN THE COMPLEX SYSTEM ARE FREQUENTLY IGNORED. THESE FUNCTIONS WERE FOUND TO BE CARRIED OUT IN THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES BY BAILIFFS, COURT CLERKS, OR RECEPTIONISTS. THE ARTICLE CONTAINS A SHORT BIBLIOGRAPHY. --IN FRENCH. (SAJ)
Index Term(s): Austria; British Columbia; Comparative analysis; France; Juvenile courts; Massachusetts; Multinational studies; Quebec; Research design; Research methods; Saskatchewan
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=64551

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.