Juvenile justice project. What is juvenile justice, and what has changed since its appearance in Russia? Foreign negative experience
Juvenile justice - Most Russians, if they have heard about it, have only heard about it. Some kind of courts for minors... It seems like nothing bad... Let the specialists deal with the children. And ordinary courts may lighten up a little.
Well, some human rights activists, persistently persuading our authorities to adopt laws on juvenile justice, are somehow in no hurry to enlighten us on this matter. They only talk about some kind of radical restructuring of work with minors and that everything will be fine. They also nod to the West, but again try to keep specifics to a minimum. It would seem that you want to convince - convince, give as many positive examples as possible. But no! The experience of actress NATALIA ZAKHAROVA, who became closely acquainted with this system in France, shows that hushing up details in this case is completely justified. For it is unlikely that, having understood what we are really talking about, the deputies will vote en masse for such an innovation.
But first, let us recall the story of Natalia herself. In the early 90s. she married a Frenchman, went to Paris and gave birth to a daughter. However, life did not work out, as the husband abused the girl and used drugs. After the divorce, by decision of the family court, Masha remained with her mother, and if the matter had taken place in Russia, this would have continued to this day. But in France there is also a juvenile court. When Masha was 3 years old, at the request of her ex-husband, she was forcibly separated from her mother, sent to an orphanage, and then to a foster family. And for about 10 years now, Natalya has not been able to return her daughter. Moreover, this is a woman of rare determination. She personally met with Nicolas Sarkozy, the current President of France, 18 (!) times on the matter of her daughter. When Mr. Chirac, as President of France, came to Russia, the question of Masha’s return was raised in a conversation with V.V. Putin. Patriarch Alexy II turned to the Cardinal of France (and during his recent visit to France, also to Nicolas Sarkozy) with a request to help reunite the family. But the problem has not yet been solved, because juvenile justice is a state within a state. It is a kind of “legal Vatican” and acts at its own discretion.
Protecting children's rights is a convenient cover
Under the guise of protecting the rights of the child, juvenile judges often destroy completely normal families. The law states that a child is removed from the family only if his life is threatened by physical, mental and moral violence. But what exactly is meant is not specified, and this gives scope for a broad interpretation of various situations. There are not isolated cases when a parent who abuses a child goes unpunished, but the one who loves and cares for the child suffers. Associations created in France to protect family rights receive complaints about flagrant violations of the law by judges and impunity for criminals. For example, the father turned out to be a pedophile, and a six-month-old child was raped by him, which was irrefutably shown by a medical examination. But the father did not suffer any punishment and even... continued to communicate with the child! Natalya Zakharova also recalls such a case. A woman turned to one of the associations for help. Her ex-husband was the warden of the prison. One day, their five-year-old son came after a meeting with his dad and told him that he had hurt him with his friend Philip (who, by the way, worked... as a psychologist in the same prison! When the shocked mother turned to the children's judge and showed a medical report about the rape of the boy , the judge ordered: “Immediately take the child away from the mother and place him in an orphanage, because the mother is manipulating the child and turning him against the father. The baby was forcibly torn from his mother and taken to the orphanage.”
The juvenile justice system did not help our compatriot Nadezhda Kalinina either. The French ex-husband stole their common child and took him to France. At the request of his mother, in December 2004, the prosecutor's office of the central district of St. Petersburg opened a criminal case against him under Article 132 Part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (violent acts of a sexual nature, including against minors). But the child still remains with his father, whom Nadezhda accuses of pedophilia.
In 2000, the French government, under pressure from professionals raising the alarm, asked the Inspector General of Social Affairs, Pierre Naves, and the Inspector General of the Legal Department, Bruno Catal, to submit a report on the situation in the juvenile courts and social services regarding the separation of children from their parents. The report was extensive and completely shocking. “A huge number of children are taken from their parents and placed in shelters and foster families. Judges and social service workers routinely break the law. There is a huge difference between the law and the practice of its application. In the same court, the practice of one judge differs from the practice of another. There is no quality control of the child and family protection system. The juvenile justice system shows no respect for the family, no concern for it. The prosecutor's office cannot monitor all cases, as there are too many of them. Social workers and judges have complete, unlimited power over the fate of the child. Social services workers often removed children through anonymous phone calls. Allegedly, someone called them and said that this or that family was in danger.”
A typical example: parents went to buy bread from a nearby store, leaving their daughter in the yard. Social services workers appear out of nowhere and ask why she is alone. She says: “Because I’m in my yard, I’m playing here. Mom and Dad will come now.” The parents actually return immediately. But it's too late! They are already accused of not taking good care of their child, leaving him alone.
While serving as Minister of Family Affairs, Sigalene Royal (who later competed with Sarkozy in the presidential elections and promised voters to legalize gay marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children) issued a decree. Its meaning is that if any teacher or social worker suspects child abuse, they should report it to the appropriate authorities, even if they have no evidence. Sanctions may be applied to those who are not vigilant.
Theory and practice of juvenile justice
“In the French law,” says Natalya Zakharova, “it is written that placing a child in a shelter is carried out as a radical measure, in any case, at least after a meeting of the judge with the parents and the child. When I was put in the bullpen 9 years ago (for what, I have not yet been explained), my daughter was forcibly and fraudulently placed in a shelter, about which I knew absolutely nothing, even where it was located! She stayed there for a whole week, and only then the judge scheduled a meeting. But even then. I was not given the address of the shelter and was officially banned from visiting, although Masha was sick, with a temperature of 40. But she was only three years old, and besides, she did not speak French. That is, my daughter suffered severe psychological trauma, but This did not concern either the judge or the social services staff. And only thanks to the incredible efforts on my part and Masha’s demands to see my mother, after 4 (!) months I was allowed 45-minute meetings. This is absolutely illegal, because before such harsh measures are applied. sanctions against parents, they need to bring at least some charges. However, no charges were brought against me then, and the court decision said: “Due to the fact that the father is convicted of violence against the child and accuses the mother of this, the child must be immediately placed outside the zone of family conflict.” Do you understand? The father is “convicted”, but at the same time he “accuses”... And what kind of “family conflict” do we have with him, when by that time we had long been divorced?! He had a conflict with Masha, whom he deliberately subjected to violent acts and once returned in a coma only to have her taken away from me and placed in a shelter. He didn’t want to pay child support until he was 18.”
At first Natalya thought there was a mistake. But after creating a parent association, and reading the cases of other parents who had suffered from the French juvenile justice system, she realized that her story was quite typical. Many reports and court decisions were written as if they were carbon copies. It became clear that there is a certain matrix: a ready-made text is taken, the last name is changed, and then everything goes according to the already worked out pattern.
“According to the law,” says Natalya, “social service employees must be the link between a child separated from his parents. They must do everything to ensure that family ties are preserved, because it is declared that juvenile justice is aimed at family reunification. But in reality, the opposite is true. My letters, photographs, toys and other gifts were not even given to Masha by the employees of these services. Why? - I was accused of wanting to maintain too close a connection with my daughter and “suffocating her with my motherly love.”
It turns out that for many French judges in children's cases, “suffocating, predatory love” is a very dangerous act that can cause terrible physical and moral harm to a child. For example, Judge Valentini, the fourth judge in “Masha’s case,” said in a conversation with lawyer N. Zakharova that in 9 out of 10 cases she takes children away from their parents precisely on this basis.
The effectiveness of the work of a children's judge is assessed by the number of “protected”, that is, removed children. The more children she “protects” from their parents in this way, the faster she moves up the career ladder and improves her financial situation. It turns out that judges supply children to social services, and they, in turn, write the necessary reports, about which the leading French lawyers Naves and Catala indicated in their report to the Minister of Justice that they are always negative and always opposed to the parents.
In the “juvenile” coordinate system, the child is convinced that it is not the parents who are the main ones in the family, but the judge, the prosecutor, and the state. Thus, the authority of the parents is undermined. The socio-psychological center that “takes care” of Masha Zakharova, who was taken from her mother, has its own website on the Internet, where you can read something like the following: “Dear children! If you have problems, if you are unhappy with your parents, then you can always come to us at such and such an address. We will listen to you and give you the advice you need. Here is a boy like that... he had very bad parents...” And then there are a lot of cases where the parents are simply presented as monsters!
“Whether there were such cases in reality and where the center’s employees got them from is unknown,” says Natalya. “Judging by what we hear from people contacting human rights associations, these are mostly fabrications and denunciations. But children believe and they set themselves up accordingly! For example, the parents did not give the teenager money for cigarettes. He came to such a “kind” aunt and complained. And this is the first step into the abyss, because the aunt wrote down the address, phone number, place of work of the parents and asked a number of provocative questions. And then I wrote a report to the judge for children’s cases: “THE CHILD HIMSELF came to me! We need to sound the alarm!” The system of removing children from their families in France, the cradle of human rights, is simply monstrous, even to the point that criminal cases are deliberately fabricated, and parents who try to return their children are sent to prison, where they are kept together with pedophiles and murderers. And the state singles them out. five billion euros annually for this system."
Why are they doing this?
“But what’s the point of organizing such a theater of the absurd?” I ask. “Why don’t defenders of children’s rights protect children from disadvantaged families, but interfere with prosperous ones?”
“There is a meaning, and it is very simple,” explains Zakharova. “Disadvantaged children need to be seriously dealt with. They have an upset psyche, a difficult character, a whole “bouquet” of various diseases. You need to tinker with them a lot to bring them back to normal. And the employees social services, as a rule, do not want to strain themselves. They recruit just anyone. There is even such a technique: criminals released from prison are sent to work with children in social services for the purpose of re-education. You can imagine the manners of these “educators”!.. from good families, firstly, there is no special need to study, and secondly, parents are obliged to pay for their maintenance in a foster family. After all, the state allocates only part of the money, and the other part is paid by the parents. Can you imagine what a sophisticated mockery it is to take away the children? , parents are also obliged to pay for the fact that their child is raised by strangers. Therefore, the richer the parents, the more profitable it is to take their children away. The story of Italian millionaires was widely covered in the French press. They settled in Saint-Tropez, but retained Italian citizenship. However, neither wealth nor foreign citizenship protected them from juvenile tyranny. Their common child, a seven-year-old girl, and her mother’s twenty-year-old daughter from her first marriage lived with them. This girl didn’t like something: either her mother didn’t give her enough money, or she didn’t have the right car. In short, she came to the police and stated that her parents were treating her little sister terribly, tying her to the bed and not allowing her to eat. The police, without making any inquiries, burst into the house, grabbed the frightened, sobbing girl, handcuffed her parents in front of her and took her to prison. The eldest daughter rejoiced. It was New Year's Eve, and thus she received at her disposal an apartment, her parents' wallet - in general, all the blessings of life. When the parents demanded an explanation, they were told: “We have become aware that you are mistreating your child.” “But at least ask the child how we treat her!” - the parents were indignant. The baby was traumatized, screaming that she wanted to go to her mother, she loved her parents, she felt good with them... However, the judge decided that it was necessary to conduct an investigation, as usual. Therefore, the girl was sent to an orphanage, and her parents were sent to prison. They begged to be allowed to go home at least for the New Year, and offered a huge amount of deposit so that they would be allowed to spend the holiday with their child. But even this had no effect; they remained in prison. I don’t know what their fate is today.”
The report by Naves and Cathal cited scary figures. In 2007, it was stated that 50% of children were taken away illegally. According to experts, back in 2000, there were about 2 million children taken away.
“Now, probably, even more,” says N. Zakharova. “If judge Anne Valentini, by her own admission, takes away 9 children out of 10, and she has 200-300 cases, then you can imagine how many children, by her mercy, suffer in shelters and foster families. And how many such judges are there in France?! The system is bursting at the seams, and the authorities must admit this. A few months ago, a family judge took a child away from her, and was very rude to her. A desperate woman attacked him. "
Totalitarianism without quotes
I ask you to give some more examples when children were taken away from normal parents.
Natalya doesn’t have to strain herself for long: “There are a lot of such cases. I’ll give you the ones that shocked me the most. We had a big meeting at the parent association, which was attended by 250 affected families from different cities in France. A young pregnant woman was sitting next to me. She told , that after her divorce from her husband, social services employees wrote a denunciation against them, and their little child was placed in a shelter. Then she met another man, married him, and when she gave birth to a child from him, the baby was taken straight from the delivery table. She didn’t even have time to look at it! She was told that since she was a bad mother for the first child, she would probably be a bad mother for the second one too. Therefore, the life of the newborn is in danger, he must be urgently isolated from her! “Having listened to this story,” Zakharova adds, “I asked with horror: “Aren’t you afraid that the child you are now carrying will be taken away from you?” “We are afraid,” the woman and her second husband answered in one voice. “But we want to have children and decided to take the risk.” And the second case - with a woman in a wheelchair, four children were taken away from her. Why - I couldn’t. understand. She was married, the family was quite decent. Either because of a denunciation, or something else, as usual, nonsense... The taken children were placed not in one, but in four different shelters, and she had to go to them by train. For her, it was sheer torture, because every time the stroller had to be dragged onto the train, then taken out, there was no one to do it... Moreover, all four children sometimes had to be visited on the same day, since social service employees make appointments without agreeing on a date with the parents, nor the time. They determine everything themselves, and the parents are obliged to blindly obey. And if a disabled woman could not meet the time - say, there was no suitable train that day or she became physically ill - a report was filed against her that she refused to come to the meeting. date because he doesn't like his children. In the “juvenile system,” parents are in the position of always being accused. When they write letters to children, send toys, and seek meetings, they “suffocate children with love.” And when a person cannot come due to health reasons or because he does not have time, he is accused of indifference to his child. And perhaps the most important meaning in all this bacchanalia is ideological. When I, in protest against the ongoing lawlessness, went on hunger strike for 18 days and was twice close to death, the Russian embassy secured a meeting with Yves Bot, the prosecutor general of the court. And he told me: “Madam, don’t think that we only took our daughter away from you. We also take children away from French parents.” I asked why, and he replied: “They give us an order from above, we are obliged to carry it out. If the guidelines change tomorrow, we will not remove children in such numbers.” This, in my opinion, is a purely Trotskyist ideology of the destruction of the family. Parents must grovel before judges, tremble before social service workers and follow their every instruction. Then they will be considered law-abiding citizens, but their children can still be taken away from them. In fact, the same thing is written in the already mentioned report by Naves and Cathal: parents feel absolutely helpless and humiliated. They don't know where to turn for protection."
Large families are especially vulnerable. Social services claim that parents are allegedly unable to support their children and easily take them away. Although here (as in other cases when arbitrariness occurs) one can also act selectively. In modern France there are a large number of large families from African and Arab countries. Many of them live on benefits. The state provides them with apartments and free medical care. But their children, as a rule, are not touched. “Today,” says N. Zakharova, “for every 20 newborn children there are only four native French, the rest are immigrants. Therefore, why fill the orphanages with them? And now, it seems to me, Russian children are also in great fashion. In France a campaign has been launched regarding the adoption of children from Russia. The wife of the former Minister of Justice of France received official permission from the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation for her association to adopt our children to France. If juvenile justice is introduced in Russia, this will significantly facilitate the work of this association."
Someone will probably be surprised: why do the French adopt Russian children if they themselves have so many social orphans? It turns out that actually adopting a child in France and probably in other developed countries is very difficult. It takes from 5 to 7 years to collect documents. Those foster families discussed above do not adopt children, but take them in for upbringing, for which they receive money from the state. (Such a system is now very much promoted in our country). But this is still not your child. Social services, at any time, if they deem it necessary, can transfer him to another family (Masha Zakharova, for example, has “served time,” as her mother puts it, in two foster families). Therefore, many French people are willing to pay a lot of money to adopt children from abroad.
When a child is taken away from normal, loving parents, it is so monstrous that not everyone can survive such a tragedy. This was the case in the family of Natalya’s friend, chairman of the Family Rights association. Two girls were taken from them. Social services workers told the mother that she would not see children until they were 18 years old. What else they told her is unknown, but when the husband returned from work, a police car and an ambulance were standing near the door, and his wife’s body was being taken out of the house. Such cases are not isolated.
Living in a country that considers itself the birthplace of human rights, constantly hearing on radio and television that the French government is concerned about the violation of human rights in other countries, the French cannot even imagine that someone can interfere with impunity in their family life, at any time for days to break into the house, rummage through the closets, climb into the refrigerator, interrogate what they feed the children, what they drink, how they dress. So when this happens, they are terribly shocked. But until this happens, the French retain the illusion of the inviolability of their home, because the press studiously avoids the topic of forced separation of children from their parents. True, four central French newspapers wrote about the “Masha case,” but this happened thanks to the intervention of Russian politicians and diplomats. Since the scandal even reached the Council of Europe, it was no longer possible to completely hush up this story.
When the court makes a decision to remove a child, the parent can appeal. For 9 years, Natalya Zakharova filed an appeal each time the court extended Masha’s stay in the foster family for another year. But all attempts to defend her rights were in vain. “Defending the honor of the uniform,” she says, “the appellate court, as a rule, upholds the original decision of the court. Then the only way is a cassation appeal, after which nothing else can be done. Unless you go to the European Court. But with a cassation appeal, the case is not considered in essence, but in form: were the articles of the law violated in the court decision? I filed a cassation appeal only once, since it costs about three thousand dollars, and then, if the case is accepted for consideration, it will cost even more. There is a danger here: if the court considers your complaint to be unfounded, you will be sentenced to a large fine for doubting the correctness of the court’s decision. It turns out that juvenile justice, like metastases, has spread throughout the “organism” of French justice. As Minister of the Interior, he couldn’t help me get my child back! This is a real psychological and moral terror. In 2006, the Minister of Family Affairs, Philip Bass, tried to pass a law that would allow social service employees to visit underprivileged families who are expecting a child and give them to them! my conclusion: are there conditions for raising a future child, what are the moral characteristics of future parents. Moreover, they would have to visit several times during pregnancy, “monitoring the situation.” And considering that the family is “dysfunctional”, they could take the baby away immediately after birth. Fortunately, this bill did not pass. However, his very appearance speaks volumes. The power of social service workers over the family is already enormous, but they want to expand it even more. How many times did Judge Valentini repeat when communicating with me: “Here I decide!” I know what’s best for Masha!” And what scope there is for lawlessness! Imagine, an employee of such a service comes to a family. They are clean and beautiful. And she’s jealous that she doesn’t have anything like that. Often these are single women, childless, losers, angry at the whole world. And such a woman feels her small but terrible power. She knows that she can destroy the happiness of a married couple, and writes a negative report... And since she is a civil service employee, they can’t help but believe her... That’s it, the fate of the spouses and their child is now decided. This is totalitarianism without any quotation marks, without the slightest exaggeration!”
Russian supporters of juvenile justice convince society and the authorities that it is necessary to close the colonies, abandon the repressive approach and engage in “rehabilitation”. Supposedly this will help reduce crime. “To what extent have these approaches proven their effectiveness in France?” - I’m interested.
The answer is short but expressive: “We saw this system in action when French teenagers burned down schools, hospitals and even police stations. As a result, they were summoned to the Elysee Palace, and Mr. Chirac carefully found out what they needed to be completely happy. All criminals "who were caught at the scene of the arson were released the next day. Innocent parents are sent to prison, and juvenile bandits and hooligans are forgiven."
Many of our current troubles stem from the fact that at one time we did not take an interest in the essence of the proposed “reforms”, but took the reformers at their word. The result is millions of premature deaths, an increase in crime and socially significant diseases, a sea of tears, and many human tragedies. But what awaits us as a result of “juvenile” experiments on the family will be even worse. If the family collapses, the whole society will collapse. We do not need “juvenile” justice, but strengthening traditions, family support, and moral education.
Juvenile justice in faces - Juvenile lobby
Zykov Oleg Vladimirovich |
|
 |
|
|
|
Altshuler Boris Lvovich |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Peter Dutkevich (Canada) |
|
|
|
Golovan Alexey Ivanovich |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is juvenile justice?
Historically, the definition of “juvenile justice” referred to a separate justice system, special courts for minors, which appeared in Europe, the States, and Russia at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. It was assumed that minors who had committed a crime could be sent to the path of correction without applying punishment to them, transferring them under the supervision of guardianship and trusteeship authorities.
In the modern world, juvenile justice is interpreted as a system of organizations and institutions, legal mechanisms, social, psychological, pedagogical and rehabilitation programs aimed at protecting the rights, freedoms and interests of minors. Currently, several types of such systems have been established in world practice:
- Anglo-American,
- continental,
- Scandinavian
The Anglo-American model is aimed primarily at preventing child crime. Contains a specialized system of measures to influence the child, depending on the age and severity of the offense committed.
The continental model places the judge as the main figure of correction and education, who accompanies the offender from the first fact of violation and performs the functions of not only a judge, but also a social worker.
The Scandinavian model is closest to the Russian realities of working with difficult teenagers. This model is distinguished by:
- the leading role of social workers;
- rare cases of deprivation of liberty of an offender until adulthood.
International specialists, at the initiative of UNICEF (the United Nations Children's Fund), prepared the “UN Guidelines for Assessing Indicators in the Field of Juvenile Justice,” which identifies 15 indicators characterizing the justice framework for children. The main ones:
- children in detention;
- children in pre-trial detention;
- sanctions in the form of imprisonment;
- special juvenile justice system.
Juvenile justice in Russia - what is it?
Juvenile justice in Russia is a judicial and legal system whose main task is to protect the rights of minor citizens.
In one form or another, juvenile justice has existed in Russia for quite a long time. The work of guardianship and trusteeship authorities and commissions for minors is also an element of a large system aimed at protecting the rights, interests and correction of minors. In a narrower sense, these are sections of the criminal and penal codes devoted to the peculiarities of criminal liability and serving sentences by minors.
Meanwhile, since the beginning of 2000, active work has been underway to introduce the juvenile justice system in Russia in an orderly manner, which will include, first of all, a general legislative framework, organized activities of judicial, law enforcement, trusteeship, medical, social and rehabilitation institutions and organizations, educational activities.
Don't know your rights?
In 2004, the first juvenile court in Russia was created in Taganrog. In practice, everything ended with the allocation of a separate building and separate judges, considering cases only for juvenile offenses. No other activities, the primary ones being socio-psychological assistance, rehabilitation and prevention, were carried out.
According to data for 2017-2018, there are 11 panels of judges in juvenile courts of general jurisdiction in the following regions of Russia:
- Taganrog, Shakhtinsky and Azov city courts, Egorlyk district court - in the Rostov region;
- Angarsk City Court - in the Irkutsk region;
- Abakan City Court - in the Republic of Khakassia;
- Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky City Court - in the Kamchatka Territory;
- Yeletsky District Court - in the Lipetsk region;
- Volodarsky and Bezhetsky district courts of Bryansk, Dubrovsky district court - in the Bryansk region;
- Ulyanovsk Regional Court (specialized panel at the board for criminal cases).
Law on juvenile justice in the Russian Federation
Currently, the legislative basis for what can be called juvenile justice in Russia consists of:
- Family Code of the Russian Federation (in particular Chapter 22, which contains provisions on the possibility of removing children in difficult life situations from families);
- Federal Law “On the Basics of the System for the Prevention of Neglect and Juvenile Delinquency” dated 06/09/1999 No. 120-FZ;
- Resolution of the plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 1, 2011 No. 1 “On the judicial practice of applying legislation regulating the specifics of criminal liability and punishment of minors.”
There is no law on juvenile justice in Russia as such. However, for a long time, activities have been ongoing to develop and adopt either a separate law, or introduce changes and additions to existing ones. Thus, draft federal laws have been developed to introduce amendments and additions to the federal constitutional law “On the judicial system in the Russian Federation” dated December 31, 1996 No. 1-FKZ; federal laws “On the basic guarantees of the rights of the child in the Russian Federation” dated July 24, 1998 No. 124-FZ, “On the fundamentals of the system for the prevention of neglect and juvenile delinquency” dated June 9, 1999 No. 120-FZ; to the Family Code of the Russian Federation of December 29, 1995 No. 223-FZ.
The explanatory note to the draft federal law “On introducing amendments to the federal constitutional law “On the judicial system in the Russian Federation” explains the proposed procedure for reforming the juvenile justice system:
- Stage 1 - preparation and approval of the mentioned federal law;
- Stage 2 - preparation and approval of the law “On juvenile courts in the Russian Federation”;
- Stage 3 - preparation and approval of the general law “On the fundamentals of the juvenile justice system.”
However, nothing has been developed or adopted at this time.
Opinions in favor of juvenile justice
Supporters of the introduction, or more precisely, legislative implementation, of juvenile justice in the Russian Federation are, as a rule, people whose professional and work activities are related to working with juvenile offenders and children from disadvantaged families.
Faced with juvenile delinquents every day, law enforcement officials, for example, understand that juvenile delinquency cannot be measured in general categories and that adult lawbreakers and children cannot be treated equally. After all, real punishment does not always correct, and sometimes even vice versa - it aggravates the existing problem.
Employees of the guardianship authorities, working with dysfunctional families, know better than anyone else how powerless and defenseless children can be in the family and how powerless the guardianship authorities, called upon to guard the rights of the child, can be.
Despite the prevailing opinion that the introduction of juvenile justice will lead to the mass separation of children from their parents, supporters of the introduction of juvenile justice note that the main task of this institution should be to preserve the birth family for the child.
Among the supporters of juvenile justice in Russia one can name N.I. Shilov, Chairman of the Vasileostrovsky Court of St. Petersburg and Chairman of the Association of Judges of Russia for Juvenile Affairs; Markova I.I. - Chairman of the Lipetsk Regional Court and Chairman of the working group on the creation, implementation and development of juvenile justice mechanisms in the Russian justice system; Kucheren A.G. - head of the commission for public control over the activities of law enforcement agencies of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation.
Opinions against juvenile justice
There are more than enough opponents to the introduction of juvenile justice in Russia. They can all be divided into three groups.
- Group 1 - citizens who are mistaken in their opinion about the tasks, goals, purpose and structure of the institution of juvenile justice. Simply put, they protest from ignorance and lack of information.
- 2nd group - citizens who fear that regulatory authorities will receive unlimited powers to carry out inspections of families will be opposed to parents in a “parent-child” relationship.
- Group 3 - citizens protesting for religious reasons. This category of citizens believes that the principles of juvenile justice do not correspond to Russian traditional culture and Orthodox spirituality.
Finding the opinions of opponents of juvenile justice in the press and the Internet is much easier than the opinions of supporters. It seems that there are many more opponents of this idea than supporters. This may be true, but it's not because the idea of a juvenile justice system is bad. Often opponents and supporters talk about different things.
As a rule, citizens who support the introduction of the institution of juvenile justice limit themselves to the idea of introducing a special system of courts for minors and a system of institutions for the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. Opponents tend to include in the concept of juvenile justice all activities that concern minors: family control by guardianship authorities, health passports, the ombudsman system, and others. And since many of them in Russia are completely new, have not been worked through, and are sometimes doubtful, the ground for fear is very fertile.
Recently, there has been a lot of noise in society that juvenile law in Russia is being introduced in order to offend, and not to protect children. And it concerns the life and health of minors. Let's figure out how the foreign term “juvenile” is deciphered; this innovation is useful to the country or will lead to its degradation. The matter is quite complicated. Russian society traditionally treats the younger generation with reverence. If, for example, people are ready to tolerate innovations in the economy or political system, then they are suspicious of changes in such an area as raising children.
What is "juvenile"?
This word is in any collection that explains the meaning of the terms. No special explanations are given there. The word comes from the Latin juvenalis, "youthful" in translation. Juvenile is immature. It is clear that we are talking about children who are physiologically unable to conceive.
Psychologists say that the personality of an immature person has not yet been fully formed; it can be changed by influencing in the right direction. The “rights of the child” are at the forefront. In quotes because it has been exaggerated almost beyond recognition.
It should be noted that the term “juvenile” is a Western innovation. The history of its introduction into society goes back decades. In the last century, all countries faced child crime. This phenomenon was a completely natural consequence of wars and economic decline in Europe, the USSR, the USA and other countries. They solved it in different ways. In the Land of Soviets, special government bodies were organized that dealt with each fate, taking into account the priority of upbringing in the family.
Western way
Another thing is the countries of the capitalist world, where money is more important than the soul. Instead of understanding why parents do not create conditions for raising children, the West has introduced a system of punishments for every slightest offense. Nowadays, a child can be taken away because the floors in the apartment are not washed or toys are scattered. The system developed according to the principle: children can do anything. Now this idea has hypertrophied into the following principle: for wrongdoing means violating his rights. Juvenile law involves considering family misunderstandings from the angle of the full priority of the “rights” of children. If a child cries, the parents are to blame; if he is offended, he should be taken away from the family, and the like. It gets to the point where mom and dad become slaves of their offspring, whose “whip” is the state system. Naturally, parental love is exploited under such a system.
Juvenile system
A democratic society is strong with its written laws. Citizens are placed by the state in conditions where the rules cannot be violated under any circumstances. The slightest deviation from the law results in immediate punishment. However, if in case of ordinary violations a citizen can apply to the court to protect his rights, then the situation is completely different when implementing the juvenile system. It includes special bodies that look for cases of violation of children's rights. They act quickly and secretly, that is, children are seized anywhere without informing their parents about their location. Within a few days the case goes to closed court. The decision of this body is also made quickly. The child is permanently removed from the family, without the opportunity to protest such an action by either party. The state takes the child under its care, and it is extremely difficult to return him.
Juvenile law in Russia
Until recently, the old bodies dealing with the rights of minors continued to operate almost throughout the entire territory of the post-Soviet space. Let us recall that their principle is the priority of family education. But democratic transformations have also reached this area, which is sensitive for the entire society. The West, at the expert level, insists that no system can be as useful and rational for children as the juvenile system. Russia decided to implement its principles in its country. No one has explained why our society has laws that are absolutely contrary to folk traditions. Since the time of Tsar Gorokh, in Greater Russia it was believed that the family is the main component of a strong and strong state. It was also called the “cell” of society. In the family, children receive normal life skills, absorb the traditions of the people, and the like.
Opponents and critics of the juvenile system
It should be noted that the described view of education caused serious unrest among citizens. At present, the law on juvenile justice in Russia has already been adopted. This document is called: “On the fundamentals of social services for citizens in the Russian Federation.” Alarm bells turned into alarm bells. The fact is that the introduction of the juvenile system creates a gigantic split between society and the authorities. First of all, it is associated with the closed nature of decision-making by juvenile justice authorities. The state interferes in family affairs, which, according to our tradition, are decided by the citizens themselves at their own discretion. And they have the right (even if it is not enshrined in law) to decide how to raise their offspring, including by what methods.
But this is only the first layer of the problem.
The most important split will be along the axis of citizens' trust in government. According to juvenile principles, the state takes care of children. Do you know those who voluntarily give their beloved child to strangers? Society, as the initiators of such legislation hope, will openly and frankly express distrust of the current government. And this, apparently, is exactly what the innovators are seeking, seeking to destroy the well-being of Russia and its citizens. There are no other conclusions from the concept of “juvenile” for our society, taking into account the practice of Western countries.
In fact, juvenile justice was supposed to become a very positive system, with the help of which the salvation of children from dysfunctional families would be ensured, the actions of parents in relation to their own children would be combated, and so on. But in fact, it absolutely does not fulfill its functions. Neither in those countries where it exists in a relatively rudimentary state, such as Russia, Ukraine or Belarus, nor where this system has already been created a long time ago and is actively operating. Statistics show that the number of crimes, suicides and similar events only increases when this very justice intervenes in the problem.
What is juvenile justice
This concept refers to the judicial and government structure, the main goal of which should be the protection of citizens in general and families in particular. Such a system has existed for a very long time, both in Europe and in Russia. Another thing is that previously it worked more or less adequately, responding to really serious problems such as juvenile delinquency, grievous bodily harm to children, and so on. However, gradually, step by step, another juvenile justice system is moving forward in Russia. The law, which has already been adopted at the moment, entitled “On the Basics of Social Services for Citizens in the Russian Federation,” is another factor that is increasingly strengthening the position of those individuals who seek to have full power and uncontrollable control over all children in the country. This sounds somewhat unexpected, but in fact it is so. If previously there were lengthy proceedings for each individual case, now a simple anonymous denunciation (which no one tracks at all) will be enough. As a result, a child can be taken away even from a fairly prosperous family. The cause could be anything from dirty dishes to toys scattered on the floor. By the way, collected toys and washed dishes can also become a cause with a certain imagination.
Historical background
The first attempts to somehow optimize legislation regarding minors were made back in 1845. Gradually the system was refined and optimized. After the revolution in the USSR, there were also similar laws that, to one degree or another, regulated the responsibility of minors. For example, depending on their age and crimes committed, some of them received the same punishments as adults. With the only exception - the highest measure of social protection (that is, execution) was never used. True, there are at least two documented evidence that in some cases it was still used. But even here everything was completely justified. In the first case, the highest punishment was imposed for 10 arson and 8 murders committed by the same person. In the second, the murder of a woman and a small child. In the modern world, juvenile justice in Russia has not yet acquired such a scale as, for example, in the USA or Europe. But the population, which understands the problem and knows how to think, is already actively criticizing even these small steps.
Official goals
In order to describe the problem more or less accessible and understandable, it is necessary to show with examples how this system should operate. So, if there is a child who deliberately committed a crime, fully understanding the essence of the problem, he is obliged to bear responsibility. In a normal situation, he should be in a special prison. In the case of juvenile justice, he will be sent to special institutions for re-education. That is, in theory, instead of further traumatizing the child’s psyche, they work with him, teach him, explain him, and so on. Quite a good goal. Another example is that there is a family in which the parents drink or are drug addicts. In theory, nothing particularly good should come out of a child born in such a social unit (although there are many examples proving the opposite). To improve the baby's future life, he is taken in by the juvenile justice service. This is also quite logical and understandable; there should be no complaints about this position. These are two simple examples of how this system should operate. Unfortunately, it works completely differently.
Actual figures
The problems of juvenile justice begin with the lack of any control and the inability of parents to prove anything. That is, in essence, they have the right to this, but actual data shows that the opinion of relatives is extremely rarely taken into account. It looks something like this - there is an official who needs money. He comes to any family he wants, citing an anonymous denunciation. It is almost impossible to check the existence of such a document, and the same official can write it with his own hand, because the paper is without a signature. Further, having found fault with dirty dishes (not everyone washes them immediately), scattered toys (unsanitary conditions), lack of supposedly necessary food in the refrigerator, and so on, this person initiates the procedure for depriving parental rights. Naturally, any normal (and most abnormal) parents will be against this. To solve the problem, they are offered to pay a certain amount. That's the whole system. Simple, fast and very profitable. The same is true for any other areas of human activity. If there is proper control, clearly defined indicators and parameters that do not run counter to logic and the real state of affairs, such an institution of power may well be useful. But not in the form in which it exists now.
Pros
The main positive factors that the law on juvenile justice has, from the point of view of officials, include improving the situation within the family, reducing child crime, and so on. In theory, if the indicators by which a child can be taken away by guardianship authorities are clearly listed, and they are indeed more or less adequate, then the situation may actually improve. A simple example is that there is a family in which the child is fed fast food. This is harmful for a healthy adult, not to mention a baby. If such a fact is revealed, namely abuse, and not individual cases, confirmed by documents, then it really makes sense to begin the procedure for depriving parental rights. Such nutrition from early childhood can negatively affect the baby’s entire life and his health.
Cons
It is easy to guess that there are many more votes against juvenile justice than in favor. And this is also quite logical, because the control mentioned in the paragraph above does not exist at the moment. As a result, all the pros instantly change to cons. If we take as a basis the previously described example of fast food, then it will be enough to once notice a child with his parents eating something like this, and he can immediately be deprived of his rights. Without explanation, without the ability to prove otherwise, and so on.
Juvenile justice in Russia
In our country, such a system, fortunately, is not yet in full force. At the moment, more out of habit, all the same actions are performed as before. In fact, nothing has changed, but everything is going that way. The government officially declares that it has a negative attitude towards this, but the steps that are being taken can hardly be called negative. On the other hand, it is quite possible that this is just the tip of the iceberg, which is simply necessary to perform some other actions that are incomprehensible to ordinary people. Everything will become more or less clear when it is announced in plain text that juvenile justice in Russia is accepted or not accepted.
Ukraine
The situation is similar in other CIS countries. It is especially interesting now to look at Ukraine, which, after the last revolution, is actively striving for Europe. Naturally, no one is going to let her in, but it is quite possible to draw out all the juices. The bottom line is that juvenile justice in Ukraine, if it is adopted in the form in which it is required, will help to simply take away all the children they like and send them to other families who will pay for it in advance. How officially all this will be stated is still unknown, but the fact that this is practiced in a huge number of countries with varying effectiveness simply does not give reason to expect anything different.
Probable future of the system
Given the fact that the vast majority of people speak negatively about such an institution as juvenile justice, with some degree of probability it will be abolished to one degree or another. In fact, it will be almost impossible to completely get rid of corruption, child trafficking and similar abuses, but it will all be framed differently. Only global changes in the world can lead to truly radical measures. The simplest example would be another serious war.
Results
In general, the idea of the institution as such is quite good, and the official goals, as well as the actions that this system should take, are aimed at improving society, solving many social problems, and so on. In practice, juvenile justice does not do anything positive, so everyone who supports it either does not fully understand the problem or has their own interest in it. Naturally, it cannot in any way be aimed at improving people's lives. It is necessary to review the currently existing features and bring them to more adequate and reasonable indicators, which will actually be aimed at improving the situation, and not at worsening it.
The era of victorious juvenile justice has begun in Russia
Juvenile lobbyists achieved their goal - they deprived Russian parents of the right to raise their own children.
On July 3, 2016, the law “on spanking” was finally adopted in Russia, causing a huge public outcry.
Officially, the law is called “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on Improving the Grounds and Procedure for Exemption from Criminal Liability” and involves decriminalization, i.e. abolition of criminal liability for crimes of minor gravity.
In the first reading, bill No. 953369-6, indeed, contained the provisions of “saving criminal repression,” but by the second reading, “miraculous” changes began to occur to it, as a result of which a diametrically opposite meaning suddenly appeared in Article 116, an absurd and illogical punishment appeared : for a major crime - as mild as possible, for a minor crime - extremely severe, and, most importantly, a new, never before existing, subject of crime has been formed - a “close person”.
The content of this concept is revealed there: “In this article, close persons are understood as close relatives (spouse, parents, children, adoptive parents, adopted children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren), guardians, trustees, as well as persons who are related to the person who committed the act provided for in this article, or persons who conduct a common household with him” (clause 4 of article 1).
Back in 2013, Putin spoke out against juveniles at the congress of the Parental All-Russian Resistance.
If a relative is more to blame
For the first time, a new, special offense has appeared in the Criminal Code, equating to crimes committed “on the grounds of political, ideological, racial, national or religious hatred or enmity” - these are crimes against family members, close relatives and in-laws.
And for the first time, for “beating or committing other violent acts that caused physical pain (and the degree of severity and intensity of pain is not specified by law), but did not entail the consequences specified in Article 115 of this Code in relation to close persons,” the law established a very serious punishment.
So, for inflicting physical pain without consequences, including spanking or punishing a child with a belt, a parent will face “compulsory labor for up to 360 hours, or correctional labor for up to one year, or restriction of freedom for up to two years, or forced labor for a term of up to two years, or arrest for a term of up to six months, or imprisonment for a term of up to two years.”
This directly indicates the repressive nature of the bill in relation to the social group called “parents”; This provision allows for the imprisonment of those parents who dare to punish a child “without harm to his health,” which may imply symbolic punishment with a belt or even a banal spanking.
Another extremely important amendment to the text of the law is in Art. 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation - transfers beatings from cases of private prosecution to cases of private-public prosecution. This means that law enforcement agencies, which are obliged to terminate cases of beatings between relatives in connection with the reconciliation of the parties, will not have such an obligation after the adoption of the amendments, and any such case, even if started at the request of an outsider, will not be terminated under any pretext.
But there are laws
Anti-family amendments to the bill destroy the constitutional right of parents to raise children (Article 38) and violate Art. 63 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which states that “parents have the right and obligation to raise their children; parents are responsible for the upbringing and development of their children,” violate Section III of the Concept of State Family Policy in the Russian Federation for the period until 2025 (approved by Order of the Government of the Russian Federation of August 25, 2014 No. 1618-r), which requires “creating conditions for increasing the authority of parents in the family and society and maintaining the social stability of each family.”
The new edition of these articles of the law also comes into gross contradiction with paragraphs 76, 78 of the National Security Strategy (Presidential Decree No. 683 of December 31, 2015), according to which the protection of the family and the preservation of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values are classified as “strategic goals of ensuring national security."
What are their names
Adoption of these amendments to Art. 116 of the Criminal Code and Article 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are a huge tragic mistake for the state, for society, for the nation. But not the first in the field of juvenile justice. Back in 2007, a real juvenile bill N 485737-4 “On amendments to some legislative acts of the Russian Federation” (in terms of clarifying the procedure for removing a child in the event of an immediate threat to his life or health) was introduced into the State Duma,” and two years ago the initiators sought its adoption.
The current amendments are elements of the notorious law “On Domestic Violence,” which juvenile justice lobbyists have been pushing through in an organized and massive manner over the past few years.
Among the particularly active lobbyists of the law on domestic violence, first of all, it should be noted the Chairman of the Public Council for Human Rights Mikhail Fedotov and his associates, in particular, Svetlana Aivazova, as well as deputy Salia Murzabaeva and her working group for developing the law: lawyer Marie Davtyan, expert Svetlana Aivazova (still the same) and others, with the most active support of Senator Valentina Petrenko.
Serious fighting
The vote on bill No. 953369-6 in the Federation Council on June 29, 2016 identified new “players” in the juvenile field: the bill was presented by Senator Andrei Klishas, who passionately defended the correctness of the anti-parental amendments and argued that “this is an important law aimed at protecting traditional values"; Senator Olga Kovitidi suggested “first looking at law enforcement practice” (that is, sending a dozen or two parents to prison as an experiment), because, in her opinion, “the law is timely and correct”; Senator Valentina Petrenko did not stand aside, she called for “not to allow children to be beaten” and “not to descend to the primitive system, when it was also possible to eat a person or a child”; Senator Liliya Gumerova, who had previously noted her defense of the so-called. baby-boxes, called for the urgent introduction of “child-friendly justice,” and accused the public opposing the bill being discussed of the fact that, unlike herself, “they (social activists) have nothing to do with protecting children”; Senator Lyudmila Kostkina argued that “domestic violence is a huge problem for the Russian Federation” and therefore the law needs to be passed urgently.
Senators Svetlana Goryacheva, Vyacheslav Markhaev, Elena Mizulina announced their disagreement with the bill with varying degrees of emotionality at the meeting, and their speeches became the cause of irritation and even anger of senators Klishas and Petrenko.
The discussion was heated, and, summing up its results, speaker Valentina Matvienko proposed to urgently adopt the law, and to create a conciliation commission on these articles (Goryacheva’s proposal) and include senators Klishas and Mizulina in it to discuss the contradictions and prepare amendments to art. 116 of the Criminal Code and 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, “of course, if during the work of the commission it turns out that they are still needed.”
A little competence
Senators who spoke in favor of juvenile amendments demonstrated surprising ignorance of this issue. Thus, it would be useful for them to know that “child-friendly justice” is a concept that juvenile lobbyists around the world use specifically to designate juvenile justice, in order to give it a semblance of some kind of prettiness; this concept is an unmistakable juvenile marker, and senators discussing juvenile laws need to know such things, and not knowing is a shame.
Also, no politician is honored by stilted phrases like “maybe we’ll still allow children to eat” or juvenile cliches “the family is a place of violence” and “horrifying statistics of violence in Russian families.”
Ignorance, incompetence, lack of reliable information and a “mess in the head” from chaotic ideas about the subject of conversation are also characteristic of other senators. Thus, Anton Belyakov, who unexpectedly spoke out against the scandalous amendments, said that although he himself is one of the authors of the law on domestic violence, developed together with the Public Council for Human Rights, in these amendments he sees signs of juvenile justice and therefore opposes them. It turned out to be difficult for the senator to understand that the juvenile amendments being discussed are just part of the law he himself developed on domestic violence.
Juvenile blow
Russian society has entered a new stage of development; ahead is the abolition of the presumption of innocence, massive discrimination against a social group called “parents,” and the official nationalization of children.
Does juvenile justice exist in Russia?
Juvenile justice has been operating in developed countries for several decades and has quite contradictory characteristics. Hundreds of thousands of children have been taken from their families into state custody, and their parents have been fined or imprisoned. In Russia, JY has been actively introduced since the beginning of the 2000s. At the same time, since 2016, more than a dozen panels of judges dealing with child crimes have been adopted and exist in many regions of the country.
Juvenile justice in Russia in 2017
Juvenile justice in Russia was officially adopted in 2017 and has existed since 2016. Therefore, parents should be extremely careful and attentive to the interest of social services in their family. Today in the Russian Federation such a legislative framework has been adopted and exists mainly in a formal form and is represented by the legislative framework, as well as the positions of the judiciary, which in any situation is on the side of the problems and interests of the child.
What is juvenile justice in Russia?
Juvenile justice, which has been adopted and exists in Russia, is a system of government bodies and actions aimed at administering justice to offenders who have not reached the age of majority. Today in the Russian Federation, YU is in the implementation phase. Thanks to the actions of government officials, the following was created:
- administrative commissions dealing with the affairs of minors;
- guardianship authorities that monitor both the family as a whole and each child individually;
- socio-psychological institutions that exist on state terms, work with families and participate in legal proceedings;
- projects that allow the development of the process of functioning of juvenile courts;
- YU institutes.
Has a law on juvenile justice been adopted in Russia?
The question of whether there is juvenile justice in Russia is controversial. In 2016, on July 3, Russian President V.V. Putin signed the first, and in the opinion of the state apparatus, necessary, law No. 323-FZ. This legal act allows you to know and consolidate the basic rights and responsibilities of parents in relation to their children. Thus, YU was accepted and now exists in Russia.
Can guardianship authorities take a child from the family according to the law?
Juvenile justice in Russia, real stories of the removal of children from their families have become increasingly common. Each municipality has its own commissions and bodies that can remove a minor child from a family without a court decision. In connection with the periodic abuse of social workers’ powers and the negative impact of YJ on society, Svetlana Kopylova presented a song about the negative consequences of the introduction of such a legal norm. The work is a kind of introduction to consider the need for the adoption and existence of juvenile justice in Russia.
Pros and cons of juvenile justice
The main advantages of JU, which is accepted and exists in the Russian Federation, include:
- increasing the role of parents and society in the implementation of children's education;
- consolidation of the rights and will that every child has.
This policy of legal relations between the state and citizens also has a number of negative aspects:
- the possibility of pressure on parents from officials;
- education of irresponsible and uncontrollable individuals;
- encouraging children to denounce parents to government agencies;
- lack of rights of the older generation and teachers in relation to the child;
- impunity for crimes committed;
- increase in the number of family conflicts.
Thus, as a legal system, JJ is accepted and exists in the Russian Federation, and has its positive and negative sides. Even experienced lawyers cannot come to a consensus regarding the need to introduce such justice into the legal system of the Russian state.
Juvenile justice operates in which countries?
YU has been operating in Europe for decades. This type of justice system is most developed in:
The JJ system, which has been adopted and exists in developed countries, allows children to be taken away en masse from quite prosperous families under the pretext of defending their interests. From the experience of these countries, we can conclude that juvenile justice does not always have a positive effect on the child generation. Sometimes it has an extremely negative impact on a person’s psyche and behavior in adulthood.
Who promotes juvenile justice in Russia
What is juvenile justice? This is a system of special laws, the meaning of which is simple and terrible at the same time: by interfering in family affairs, to achieve the destruction of this most important institution of society. As always, evil dresses up in the clothes of good. Juvenile technologies and juvenile legislation are promoted under the guise of “protecting children’s rights” or “countering domestic violence.” The rights of the child are opposed to the rights of the parents, the family is artificially split. There is active propaganda among children about informing on their parents. The main task of doctors and teachers is to “give a signal.” This scheme works like this: a bruise on a child’s bottom is a “signal” that the house is “not clean enough” or “there is not enough food” - juvenile delinquents come to the house and, WITHOUT A COURT DECISION(!), take the children away. To “help” them. In Scandinavia and Northern Europe, where juvenile technologies have been introduced for a long time, the removal of children always ends with their transfer to orphanages or families for adoption. Children are never returned to their parents, almost never. In the UK, it just so happens that “by chance” the families where children are sent for upbringing are almost always… same-sex.
It's time to ask: why is all this being done? Juvenile justice is a technology for family destruction. The family is the basic unit of society and the mechanism of demographic reproduction of the people. Destroy a family, split it, neutralize its meaning - and you will immediately “kill” two birds with one stone: deprive people of support and you can interrupt the traditions and culture of the people (which are passed on in the family), you can create a situation of inevitable reduction in the number of people. If there is no family, there will be no people. This is the whole point of juvenile justice, which is one of the tools of globalization.
The unpleasant fact is that juvenile technologies have already been partially introduced in Russia. Here are just two recent facts.
1. At the end of its work, the State Duma of the previous convocation adopted, despite public protests, the notorious “Law on Spanking”. Under the guise of “protection from family violence,” changes were introduced that were equated to a clear criminal punishment, being an aggravating factor – kinship. It turned out - a slap on the butt - a bruise - even the absence of one, but the suspicion that there was a slap - 2 years in prison.
The public protests were so strong that the State Duma found the strength to admit the mistake, and its new composition (mostly consisting of the same deputies as the previous one!) removed juvenile meanings from the law.
2. In January 2017, there was another attempt to introduce juvenile crime into Russian legislation. This time, it will not be possible to point the finger at the old composition of the Duma - the new law was adopted by the new composition of the Duma. The “contingent law” proposed by the government implied the collection of data about children, to which none of the parents gave permission. This law was stopped by the President, who rejected it.
Please note: the same deputies in the same month can eliminate juvenile technologies in one law and immediately introduce them to others!
This gives us two facts, both of which are sad, but not fatal:
- State Duma deputies from United Russia, who ensure the adoption or non-adoption of laws, are completely subordinate to party-factional discipline and the leadership of the State Duma. This means that absolutely ANY law can be adopted. United Russia members have no ideological core, no own understanding of what is good and what is bad does not exist in their heads.
- In our country there is a powerful juvenile lobby that is pushing juvenile legislation through the State Duma and the Federation Council with all its might.
However, as recent events have shown, the interaction of public organizations and the President can stop the penetration of juvenile justice. But passivity and the hope that the “good gentleman” from the United Russia Constitutional Majority in the State Duma understands what cannot be voted for will quickly lead to the triumph of juvenileism.
Have you noticed how the juvenile lobby has become more active in recent days? Articles on the topic “in Russia it is allowed to beat people in the family” are littered on the pages of many publications. And all because the State Duma corrected its mistake and removed kinship as an aggravating circumstance.
An important role in the uproar was played by those forces that, outside the authorities and the media, are working with all their might for the globalists. Moreover, these forces, or rather, even persons... are very specific. Now you will understand what is meant.
On January 26, 2017, I took part in the “Evening with Vladimir Solovyov” program. In the third part there was a discussion of the fuss and crocodile tears surrounding the State Duma’s decision to correct its mistake. Among those who tried to appeal to emotions and pretended that families were now in no way protected from violence in Russia was Alena Popova. Before we talk about this person, let’s dispel the veil of lies that juvenile justice lobbyists deliberately create. Any person in Russia is protected from beatings by law: the Criminal Code has a lot of articles with different elements of crimes. Introducing a special law “for the family” is the first step towards juvenile technologies. It is no coincidence that in the documents of European juvenile workers the family is listed as THE MAIN THREAT TO THE CHILD!
But let’s return to the person who defended “juvenile values” on the air of Solovyov’s program. Here she is - Alena Popova.
For protection from domestic violence. Protects children. This is exactly how juvenile technology is always presented: protection.
But Alena Popova a little earlier.
She was an ally, a “civil activist,” of former State Duma deputy Ilya Ponomarev. The same one who was one of the leaders of the failed “snow revolution”, the only one who voted against the reunification of Russia and Crimea, received $750,000 for 10 lectures at Skolkovo. After law enforcement officers became interested in this apparent embezzlement of funds, Ponomarev fled to the United States. He is now hiding there and in Ukraine, after he was deprived of his parliamentary powers.
But Alena Popova with a white ribbon and Ilya Ponomarev during the “swamp attempts” to seize power in Russia according to the Ukrainian scenario in 2011-2012.
Then they wanted to take power, and today they decided to protect our children? Considering the political face of Alena Popova, it will not be difficult to guess which structures and which states are pushing juvenile violence in our country. This is still the same gop company of the “opposition”, “children of Captain Grant” and the Fifth Column, ready to sell the interests of their country in any form.
In Vladimir Solovyov’s program, this lady completely revealed herself. Just look.
Here is the full version of the program:
(third part, which dealt with juvenile justice - from 1 hour 20 minutes)
My words in this program:
P.S. Material on the topic of juvenile justice:
Evaluation of information
4 comments.”
These traitors to the people will do anything to harm Russia, I don’t understand why they are still free and not in prison, this infection, like an octopus, is penetrating our society more and more, they see that the people do not support them, so they took up the family , for our children, everything inside is boiling with anger.
How much longer will our public look calmly at the traitors, saboteurs and traitors to state interests who are actively promoting the Masonic plans of the Illuminati for the destruction and destruction of the Russian nation and the entire human species? When will our people's instinct of self-survival finally kick in? When will the club of popular anger fall on the heads of the genetic mutants sitting in the Duma and in the government?
No family, no people. There is a herd without attachments and ideals, and such a herd is easy to manage. Wherever you throw a carrot, the herd will jump there. The carrots are far-fetched, artificial values. Not human life, not the blue sky, the rustling of leaves, the splash of clear water and the kiss of a loved one. The smell and cooing of a native child. They want to make colorful rags, grub, loot and general laziness the greatest value for all of us. They gave you a trough with mud, gobble it up and go back to your swamp, splash around in the warm shit and don’t think about anything. Watch the feeding of pigs at the pigsty and compare the sales days called “Black Friday”. One on one battle for the trough. The family is an obstacle to the fulfillment of such plans, which is why they want to destroy it.
Alena Popova alone cannot push through laws at this level.
The Law on Juvenile Justice in Russia was adopted in 2017
07/12/2016 07:00 Moscow time
Officially, the law is called “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on Improving the Grounds and Procedure for Exemption from Criminal Liability” and involves decriminalization, i.e. abolition of criminal liability for crimes of minor gravity.
The law was prepared in response to the request of the Russian President, expressed in his message to the Federal Assembly in December 2015, to support the initiative of the Supreme Court to decriminalize criminal legislation.
In the first reading, bill No. 953369-6, indeed, contained the provisions of “saving criminal repression,” but by the second reading, “miraculous” changes began to occur to it, as a result of which a diametrically opposite meaning suddenly appeared in Article 116, an absurd and illogical punishment appeared : for a major crime - as mild as possible, for a minor crime - extremely severe, and, most importantly, a new, never before existing, subject of crime has been formed - a “close person”.
The content of this concept is revealed there: “In this article, close persons are understood to mean close relatives (husband, spouse, parents, children, adoptive parents, adopted children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren), guardians, trustees, as well as persons related to with the person who committed the act provided for in this article, or persons conducting a common household with him"(Clause 4 Article 1).
Back in 2013, at the congress of the Parental All-Russian Resistance, Putin spoke out against juveniles
If a relative is more to blame
For the first time, a new, special offense has appeared in the Criminal Code, equated to crimes committed “on the grounds of political, ideological, racial, national or religious hatred or enmity” - these are crimes against family members, close relatives and in-laws.
And for the first time for “beating or committing other violent acts that caused physical pain ( and the degree of severity and intensity of pain is not specified by law), but did not entail the consequences specified in Article 115 of this Code in relation to close persons,” the law established a very serious punishment.
So, for inflicting physical pain without consequences, including spanking or punishing a child with a belt, a parent will face “compulsory labor for up to 360 hours, or correctional labor for up to one year, or restriction of freedom for up to two years, or forced labor for a term of up to two years, or arrest for a term of up to six months, or imprisonment for a term of up to two years."
This directly points to repressive character the bill in relation to a social group called “parents”; This provision allows for the imprisonment of those parents who dare to punish a child “without harm to his health,” which may imply symbolic punishment with a belt or even a banal spanking.
Another extremely important amendment to the text of the law is in Art. 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - transfers beatings from cases of private prosecution to cases of private-public prosecution. This means that law enforcement agencies, which are obliged to terminate cases of beatings between relatives in connection with the reconciliation of the parties, will not have such an obligation after the adoption of the amendments, and any such case, even if started at the request of an outsider, will not be terminated under any pretext.
In other words, if you are caught at gunpoint by any, even false, denunciation, the scandalous neighbor said that you are beating your wife or abusing your child - the flywheel starts, and a trial is inevitable, even if in the end no one has any claims against you.
Anti-family amendments to the bill destroy the constitutional right of parents to raise children (Article 38) and violate Art. 63 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, which states that “parents have the right and obligation to raise their children; parents are responsible for the upbringing and development of their children,” violate Section III of the Concept of State Family Policy in the Russian Federation for the period until 2025 (approved by Government Order RF dated August 25, 2014 No. 1618-r), which requires “creating conditions to increase the authority of parents in the family and society and maintaining the social stability of each family.”
The new edition of these articles of the law also comes into gross contradiction with paragraphs 76, 78 of the National Security Strategy (Presidential Decree No. 683 of December 31, 2015), according to which the protection of the family and the preservation of traditional Russian spiritual and moral values are classified as “strategic goals of ensuring national security."
In the national tradition of our people, there is the right of parents to limited, loving, physical punishment of a child in case of persistent disobedience and rudeness, which is determined by the evidence of the Holy Scriptures and confirmed by accumulated pedagogical experience.
Adoption of these amendments to Art. 116 of the Criminal Code and Article 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are a huge tragic mistake for the state, for society, for the nation. But not the first in the field of juvenile justice. Back in 2007, a real juvenile bill N 485737-4 “On amendments to some legislative acts of the Russian Federation” (in terms of clarifying the procedure for removing a child in the event of an immediate threat to his life or health) was introduced into the State Duma,” and for two years the initiators sought its adoption.
The bill provided for the introduction of an accelerated procedure for separating a child from its parents - within three days, in a closed court session, and only with the enormous effort of the concerned public and even a number of Duma deputies was it possible to stop its adoption.
The current amendments are elements of the notorious law “On Domestic Violence”, which juvenile justice lobbyists have been pushing in an organized and massive manner over the past few years.
Among particularly active lobbyists for the law on domestic violence, first of all it should be noted Chairman of the Public Council for Human Rights Mikhail Fedotov and his associates, in particular Svetlana Aivazova, and also deputy Saliya Murzabaeva and its working group to develop the law: lawyer Marie Davtyan, expert Svetlana Aivazova (still the same), etc., with the most active support senator Valentina Petrenko.
The vote on bill No. 953369-6 in the Federation Council on June 29, 2016 identified new “players” in the juvenile field: the bill was presented Senator Andrey Klishas, who passionately defended the correctness of the anti-parent amendments and argued that “this is an important law aimed at protecting traditional values”; Senator Olga Kovitidi suggested “first looking at law enforcement practice” (that is, sending a dozen or two parents to prison as an experiment), because, in her opinion, “the law is timely and correct”; Senator Valentina Petrenko did not stand aside, she called for “not to allow children to be beaten” and “not to descend to the primitive system, when it was also possible to eat a person or a child”; Senator Liliya Gumerova, already noted earlier for the protection of the so-called. baby-boxes, called for the urgent introduction of “child-friendly justice”, and accused the public opposing the bill being discussed of the fact that, unlike herself, “they (social activists) have nothing to do with protecting children”; Senator Lyudmila Kostkina argued that “domestic violence is a huge problem for the Russian Federation,” and therefore the law urgently needs to be adopted.
Senators expressed their disagreement with the bill with varying degrees of emotion at the meeting Svetlana Goryacheva, Vyacheslav Markhaev, Elena Mizulina, and their speeches became the cause of irritation and even anger of Senators Klishas and Petrenko.
The discussion was heated, and, summing up its results, speaker Valentina Matvienko proposed to urgently adopt the law, and to create a conciliation commission on these articles (Goryacheva’s proposal) and include senators Klishas and Mizulina in it to discuss the contradictions and prepare amendments to Art. 116 of the Criminal Code and 20 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, “of course, if during the work of the commission it turns out that they are still needed.”
Senators who spoke in favor of juvenile amendments demonstrated surprising ignorance of this issue. So, it would be useful for them to know that "child friendly justice"- a concept that juvenile lobbyists around the world use specifically to designate juvenile justice, in order to give it a semblance of some kind of prettiness; this concept - unmistakable juvenile marker, and senators discussing juvenile laws need to know such things, and not knowing is a shame.
Also, no politician is honored by stilted phrases like “maybe we’ll still allow children to eat” or juvenile cliches “the family is a place of violence” and “horrifying statistics of violence in Russian families.”
Ignorance, incompetence, lack of reliable information and “mess in the head” from chaotic ideas about the subject of conversation are also typical of other senators. So, Anton Belyakov, who unexpectedly spoke out against the scandalous amendments, said that although he himself is one of the authors of the law on domestic violence, developed together with the Public Council for Human Rights, in these amendments he sees signs of juvenile justice and therefore opposes them. It turned out to be difficult for the senator to understand that the juvenile amendments being discussed are just part of the law he himself developed on domestic violence.
So, for the first time in Russia, a real and undisguised juvenile law was adopted, and it must be admitted that the public did not have time to repel this blow.
Russian society has entered a new stage of development; ahead is the abolition of the presumption of innocence, massive discrimination against a social group called “parents,” and the official nationalization of children.
The juvenile era has begun, and from now on parents will be prohibited from raising their children themselves, choosing the methods of educational influence themselves depending on the situation and necessity, and deciding for themselves what is good and what is bad for their child. All this will now be told to them by stern and domineering women from the guardianship authorities, who will demand unquestioning execution by parents of every letter of their new instructions and will vigilantly look for the smallest hints of bruises in their restless children.
The institution of the family in Russia faces the destruction of the educational tradition, the severance of emotional ties, the loss of control over children, the destruction of the hierarchy of relationships, forced child-centrism, pragmatism and legalized consumerism.
A mechanism for strict repressive control over the family will be created in the country, and the institution of social orphanhood will begin to expand.
As a consequence, the state will inevitably face the atomization of society and the hostility of the population.
- Archive
- Forum
© Institute of Information Technologies, 620142, Ekaterinburg, st. Stepana Razin, 16
Certificate of registration of mass media IA No. FS77-56094 dated November 15, 2013, issued by the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technologies and Mass Communications (Roskomnadzor).
Media registration certificate ElNo.FS77-56357 dated December 2, 2013, issued by the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technologies and Mass Communications (Roskomnadzor).
Use of agency materials is permitted only with the consent of the editors.
The editors are not responsible for the content of comments on site materials. Comments on site materials are the personal opinion of site visitors.
The section of jurisprudence that covers problems with the law among minor citizens is juvenile justice. Any investigator or lawyer can tell you what this is today. On the one hand, the section deals with trials of juvenile offenders, and on the other, with the protection of those same children from attacks by adults. Everything is clear with the first part. Everyone must be responsible for their actions. But juvenile justice in the Russian Federation regarding the protection of the rights of minors has many nuances.
Historical facts
Juvenile criminals had a special status back in the days of the Russian Empire. If we consider the Code of Criminal and Correctional Punishments of 1845, responsibility for acts began at seven years. Parents were punished for misdeeds by young children. In December 1866, Alexander II approved a law on the detention of juvenile criminals in special colonies with less strict living conditions. The guys could study and work here. Even then, boys and girls were kept separately.
In the Criminal Code of 1903, the age of criminal responsibility was changed. Juvenile offenders could be punished as early as 10 years. In addition, the boys were given the opportunity to serve as novices in a monastery in exchange for punishment in a colony. The foundations of juvenile justice in its modern version actively developed at the beginning of the 20th century. The first children's court appeared in 1910 and existed until the October Revolution. However, during the First World War, this segment of jurisprudence suspended its development.
In 1922, measures of punitive criminal liability were strengthened. According to the legislation of those times, a criminal at the age of 16 suffered the same penalties as an adult. A juvenile offender could be placed in a general cell in a maximum security colony. The only penalty not imposed on criminals under the age of 18 was execution.
How are things today?
The modern one in the Russian Federation was first legislated only in 1995. Then the Presidential Decree of September 14, 1995 was issued, which approved an action plan in the interests of minors. In order to strengthen the legal protection of children, a special system was developed, which received the official name “juvenile justice”. What section is this? What areas of life does it cover? Experts initially had no answers to these and many other questions. After all, the concepts concerned not only the responsibility of minors before the law, but also the protection of children’s rights.
In 1998, a law was adopted concerning the basic guarantees of children's rights in the Russian Federation. For the first time, the concept of “children in difficult life situations” appeared. This included minor boys and girls who have behavioral problems, live in or suffer violence from adult relatives. The juvenile justice system developed most actively in this regard in Moscow. Social workers kept records of dysfunctional families and monitored children whose parents had problems with the law.
The turning point in juvenile justice in Russia was the decision of the Supreme Court of February 14, 2000. Under its terms, a minor offender could be released from criminal liability if it was possible to reconcile with the victim or his relatives.
In 2008, changes were made to the Family Code. Chapter 22 has appeared, which describes the possibility of removing children from families in difficult life situations. If the situation does not change within a certain period of time, the children are sent to special institutions to be placed in new families. An article of the Criminal Code has also appeared, which provides for the responsibility of parents for failure to fulfill the duties of raising a minor. That is, juvenile justice covers the possibility of protecting a child more deeply. What does it mean? In fact, the practice of domestic punishment is prohibited by both the family and criminal codes.
Today, there are bills according to which the juvenile justice model should not be reduced only to the creation of criminal courts for minors. Experts argue that a special system for executing punishments for persons under 18 years of age should be created. In addition, issues regarding children deprived of parental care should be resolved more broadly. Adults can be deprived of the rights to raise their children only in exceptional cases.
Some projects also involve covering medical issues related to family planning and sex education for minors. The introduction of a special subject in schools will significantly help reduce crime and the birth rate of children in families with difficult life situations.
Is judicial reform necessary?
The organ system of minors today is not working at full capacity. The rights of young children in families who find themselves in difficult life situations are also not fully protected. In recent years, the foundations of the family have weakened significantly. According to social surveys, more and more children want to spend time with friends rather than with their relatives. Social networks also have a negative impact on adults. The educational responsibilities of general education institutions have also decreased.
Experts say that judicial and legal reform is necessary. Changes should primarily affect the work of social services. A high-quality record of children who are left without parental care must be established. The problem of juvenile justice in the Russian Federation is, first of all, a global lack of information. Educational institutions should also be included in the work. Teachers should keep daily records of children in class. The reason for the student’s absence must be clarified.
Juvenile justice in Moscow and other cities of the country is closely interconnected with all spheres of life. In recent years, the number of parents who abuse their children has increased significantly. The economic crisis plays an important role here. Many, left without work, are unable to feed their families. The result is prolonged depression. Morally exhausted adults begin to take their anger out on children. It turns out that creating additional jobs will help significantly reduce violence in families. Economic stability is the key to a happy life for the citizens of the country.
It should also concern control of children’s access to social networks. There is a lot of information in the public domain on the Internet that can traumatize a child’s weak psyche. Restricting minors' access to certain sites can help reduce children's aggression. As a result, the number of crimes committed by citizens under 18 years of age will decrease.
Juvenile Affairs Commissions
The main problem of juvenile justice in Russia is the imperfection of domestic legislation. Projects that concern children require close attention from specialists. It is believed that the main element of juvenile justice should be special commissions for juvenile affairs. The Russian system differs significantly from the Western one. A number of countries have created special judicial bodies for minors. It is these bodies that decide the fate of juvenile delinquents and are responsible for raising children who are left without parental care. In Russia, such issues are resolved by the same body that works with adult citizens.
Today, the country has commissions for juvenile affairs, created in Soviet times. Their activities are based on current federal laws. The main task of the body is to prevent homelessness and illegal actions of minors who have remained unattended by adults. In addition, commission employees must do everything to ensure the protection of the rights and interests of minors. For children who find themselves in difficult life situations, social and pedagogical rehabilitation is carried out.
The work of the Commission on Minors' Affairs is yielding positive results. Thanks to monitoring, it is possible to identify parents who are not coping with their responsibilities. However, such work must be carried out more actively. The interaction of social services with schools and other educational institutions will reduce the level of juvenile crime and reduce the number of minors in difficult life situations.
Basic positions on the formation of juvenile justice
Experts believe that the system that operates today must be completely destroyed. The new juvenile justice project should be implemented in the same form as in the West. At the same time, reforms should be carried out gradually, in accordance with Russian reality. International juvenile justice provides for the interaction of various spheres of life. It will be possible to protect minors if the work includes not only social services, but also educational institutions and trade unions.
There are also opposing positions. Some experts believe that juvenile justice agencies do not provide any benefit to society. Courts, guardianship authorities and other structures that have operated since the times of the USSR are fully coping with their responsibilities. There is an opinion that the introduction of juvenile justice in Russia is an excessive measure. All you need to do is make an effort to improve the current system. And a complete replacement of the structure will require a lot of financial as well as physical costs.
Juvenile justice does not eliminate it. What is this, in essence? This is a system of punishment for juvenile offenders, as well as protecting the rights of children in front of parents who fail to cope with their responsibilities. But first of all, educational work should be carried out about the methods and methods of education. If children grow up in love and care, juvenile crime will be reduced significantly. It turns out that it is not the system of punishment that needs to be improved. The main role should be given to training young parents. And social services can easily cope with this task.
Public rejection of juvenile justice
The introduction of the first principles of juvenile justice in Russia caused a storm of negative opinions and statements. According to opponents of innovation, Western norms completely contradict the national mentality, spirituality and traditions that have developed over the years. In Russian society, it is believed that a child should treat his parents with respect. Fathers and sons should not be equal. According to Western norms, children have the same rights as their parents. Experts believe that this ultimately leads to destabilization of the family, school and society as a whole. An improperly raised child is more prone to criminal acts.
Famous figures such as journalist, actress Ekaterina Vasilyeva, and political consultant Anatoly Wasserman speak out against Western-style juvenile justice. According to some political figures, juvenile technologies tend to split the Russian public into two camps.
Negative results of the activities of juvenile justice authorities
Pilot projects related to juvenile justice have already been launched in Russia. They had negative results. First of all, this is a violation of the rights of parents. Each family uses its own methods of education. According to Western standards of juvenile justice, a child can independently decide what to do and how to act in a particular situation. At the same time, his parents cannot forbid him. This situation has an extremely negative impact on the development of an immature personality.
Juvenile justice has led to a significant increase in cases of deprivation of parental rights. Adults do not always know how to defend themselves in such a situation. In many cases, the court's decision is not in favor of the family. In this case, both adults and children suffer. The introduction of juvenile justice standards also leads to an increase in the number of cases of juvenile crime. Although it would seem that it should be the other way around. A child, left without parental attention, begins to do wrong things.
Powers of juvenile authorities
According to experts, negative results were obtained due to the excessive expansion of the powers of the bodies that are part of the juvenile structure (social workers, courts). In addition, the rights of the child are interpreted incorrectly. Unfortunately, recently there has been a significant increase in the uncontrolled involvement of juvenile authorities in the affairs of individual families. There are already known cases where children were removed from their families even for absurd reasons. The child suffered first of all.
According to Western trends, juvenile authorities can also dictate to parents how to properly raise a child. After all, it is in European countries that it is believed that a small person grows and develops in society, and parents play only a secondary role. Therefore, mom and dad have much less influence on a particular child than school psychologists, teachers, and doctors.
Alternative reforms in the juvenile sector
Western jurisprudence and juvenile justice cannot in any way influence the development of the Russian state. In order to raise a normal society, one only needs to make amendments to the current family legislation. Work related to the protection of family and childhood should be aimed at reducing the number of abortions, supporting large families, and helping children who are left without parents. A special commission should be created in each school. Social services must conduct their work actively, but not aggressively.
Particular attention should be paid to children's correctional institutions. It is necessary to find out why the child committed the crime in the first place. Children often commit illegal acts under the influence of adults. Correctional institutions must work to re-educate children and teach the principles of morality and justice.
The introduction of new juvenile principles cannot do without economic aspects. Close attention should be paid to financing low-income and large families. Creators of family-type shelters should also be encouraged. If the family is provided with high-quality food, the children will be dressed and shod, will be able to have a great summer vacation, and there will hardly be any talk of juvenile crime.
Let's sum it up
Should juvenile justice develop in Russia? Both children and parents will benefit if they receive more attention from the government. However, attention should be directed to the development of the family as a whole. The aggressive principles of juvenile justice used in some Western countries will not be suitable for Russian society.
