How to measure and evaluate Juvenile Justice
in the European Union:
The IJJO Juvenile Justice
Indicators
Cédric Foussard
Director
International Juvenile Justice Observatory
www.ijjo.org
IJJO Presentation
www.ijjo.org
IJJO Presentation
 International Juvenile Justice Observatory (IJJO): International
organization based in Brussels recognized as a foundation of Public
Interest.
 Vision: International, holistic and interdisciplinary concept of juvenile
justice.
 International development of research to propose and promote
appropriate policies, legislations and intervention methods in the
context of a global juvenile justice without frontiers.
 Our target group: Universities, NGOs and public administration,
international organizations concerned by the situation of young people at
risk of exclusion and reclusion.
 Scope: Crime prevention, Intervention and educational measures and
methods, S and P inclusion
Juvenile Justice indicators
Concept
www.ijjo.org
Definition of Juvenile Justice Indicators
- Unicef :What?
“An indicator provides a common way of measuring and
presenting information that reveals whether standards are being
met”
- The IJJO in its Valencia Joint Declaration : Which extent?
This action on setting common criteria and shared basis
should continue
towards
the
establishment
of
intervention methods and policy as well as shared reeducation and reintegration projects for young offenders”
EU Text appealing for European cooperation in the field
of juvenile justice
The need of data
The Hague Programme adopted by the European
Council in 2004 recognised the importance of sustainable
cooperation in the field of juvenile justice: starting by
sharing common tools, as for instance statistics on
crime and delinquency.
...need to establish European instruments for
collecting, analysing and comparing information on
crime and victimisation and their respective trends in
Member States, using national statistics and other
sources of information as agreed indicators’.
www.ijjo.org
EU Text appealing for European cooperation in the field
of juvenile justice
Need of data and analysis
▪ European Parliament 2006 resolution “Towards an EU strategy on the rights
of the child”
-supports all cooperation initiatives between international
institutions to share experiences, information and statistical
data to improve the awareness of the situation of children in
the EU.
▪ European Economic and Social Committee 2006 Opinion: ‘The prevention
of juvenile delinquency. Ways of dealing with juvenile delinquency and the
role of the juvenile justice system in the European Union.’
-recommend to set up methodology to for developing evidence
based policies in Juvenile Justice.
▪ EC 2011 EU Agenda on the right of the Child
- Recommend to identify reliable, comparable and official data,
on child friendly justice as well.
www.ijjo.org
IJJO Juvenile Justice indicators
Background
www.ijjo.org
Background
In the last 10 to 15 years, a number of comparative researches,
studies and surveys have been dedicated to examine juvenile
justice systems in Europe, unfortunately not many managed to
identify whether national juvenile justice systems meet
the International Standards both in law and in practice.
The main difficulty lies in lack of appropriate means to
conduct a comparison, e.g. lack of common terminology or
the differing degrees to which comparable available data.
The IJJO has decided to conduct a specific investigation
on JJ indicators which has focused its interest on the European
area due to the ease of comparing similar juvenile justice
systems compared to the rest of the world.
Background
JUVENILE JUSTICE WITHOUT FRONTIERS GRANT
IJJO “Juvenile Justice without Frontiers Grant ”funded the investigation
developed by Ineke Pruin, Joanna Grzywa, Philip Horsfield (Univ. of Greifswald)
“Juvenile Justice Indicators for Europe: How to Measure Juvenile
Justice”,
This investigation provides a global framework for measuring and presenting
specific information about the situation of children in conflict with the law,
focusing on the development of specific juvenile justice indicators for Europe.
OBJECTIVES
- Develop an uniform and standardised instrument for examining whether and
to what extent the different juvenile justice standards are regarded both in the law
and in practice.
- Compare experiences of different countries and share good practices
- Promote links between European countries, which will help to harmonise
juvenile justice systems.
Background
Our investigation draws on a range of previous research and
studies, without which it would not have been possible to identify
indicators that are valid across Europe:
- UNICEF set of fifteen juvenile justice core indicators (United Nations
Office on Drugs and Crimes 2007). They are categorised into (a)
quantitative indicators, and (b) policy indicators, and have provided us
with crucial encouragements and suggestions from which to further
develop our own. Some UNICEF indicators have been incorporated
directly into the questionnaires presented here (and are clearly quoted
as such, but in the majority of cases adapted for the “European
context”)
- Research on the different European Systems on Juvenile Justice
was developed, to include efficient Indicators able to ask complex and
multi-dimensional questions. (Sources used: (McCarney (1996),
Shoemaker (1996), Dünkel/van Kalmthout/Schüler-Springorum, (1997),
Albrecht/Kilchling (2002), Kilkelly/Moore 2002, Morgan/Evans
(2002,....)
IJJO Juvenile Justice indicators
Methodology
www.ijjo.org
Methodology
International Standards- Main Principles in JJ
The following International instruments were the decisive starting point for
our deliberations:




The Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) (CRC),
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (1985)
(Beijing Rules),
The United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (1990) (Riyadh
Guidelines),
The United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (1990)
(“Havana Rules”)

General Comment No. 10 (2007): Children’s rights in juvenile justice (GC No. 10 (2007)),

Council of Europe’s Recommendation Rec(2006)2 (European Prison Rules)


Council of Europe’s Recommendation Rec(2003)20 concerning “New ways of dealing with
juvenile delinquency and the role of juvenile justice” (CM/Rec(2003)20) and
Council of Europe’s Recommendation Rec(2008)11 concerning “European rules for juvenile
offenders subject to sanctions or measures” CM/Rec(2008)11
Methodology
Definition of the indicators for the different categories of
interest and draft of two questionnaires
a) Development of Indicators:
- general and generic enough so that they are applicable to the
various juvenile justice approaches in Europe.
- sufficiently concrete to allow the degree of adherence to the
standards to be identified.
b) Development of questions, which can respond to the different chosen
aspects of European Juvenile Justice Systems, to finally determine if
International Standards are being met.
c) Implementation of the questionnaires through national representative
of Public Administration and independent expert.
d) Quantitative and Qualitative results
Methodology
Identification of the categories to focus the investigation
Questionnaire I on JJ system
Special juvenile justice system
Aims of the juvenile justice system
Scope of juvenile justice I - Routes into the juvenile justice system
Scope of juvenile justice II – Age groups
Existence of procedural safeguards for juvenile offenders
Diversion
Dispositions by the juvenile court/judge after a formal hearing
Methodology
Juveniles deprived of their liberty- following sub-categories
due to the extent of this theme
Questionnaire II on Detention
Accommodation
Supervision by staff
Provision of education
Training and leisure time
activities
Work
Health
Aggression/ self-inflicted harm/
deaths/ conflict
Regard for the right to privacy and
(religious) self determination
Disciplinary measures
Complaints and complaint procedures
Staff
Regulations and provisions governing
contacts with the outside world
Involvement of parents
Early release provisions
Aftercare
Inspections and monitoring of institutions
Release preparations
Juveniles suffering from mental illness
Methodology
Reaching agreements on the indicators and questionnaires,
and examining their validity
The presented questionnaires and indicators are intended to be regarded at this point
as suggestions before they can be employed in practice.
- European Scrutiny
To achieve the aspired-to degree of universal validity, the questionnaires should
be presented to and discussed in international boards, panels and committees that are
preferably attended by representatives of each country to which the instruments are
intended to apply. The ideal situation would be for the indicators to be agreed on at a
scientific level (integration of European juvenile justice researchers), a governmental
level and a non-governmental level.
- IJJO Network
The IJJO is working on it throught a Group of Academics which forms the
Academic Section of the European Council of Juvenile Justice.
Implementation through
the European Juvenile Justice Council
www.ijjo.org
European Juvenile Justice Council
Mission and vision
a) Formulate recommendations on the development and evolution
of juvenile justice in Europe.
b) Obtain quantitative and qualitative information on the situation
of children, adolescents and young people in conflict with the
law within the region of Europe.
c)
Serve as a transmitter on the action lines that are being
developed in various countries of Europe in fields related to
intervention with minors in conflict with the law.
d) Propose the promotion of coordinated actions between public
administrations, non-governmental organizations and academic
and training centres, in various countries in Europe.
e) Draft reports, opinions and proposals.
www.ijjo.org
European Juvenile Justice Council
Structure?
• Public Administrations
• Academic
• NGO
A European think tank composed of 81 members
from the 27 EU Member states, and as well with
specific European and international observers
and experts.
www.ijjo.org
European Juvenile Justice Council
Roma 2010

In 2010, along with the EJJO continued with the development of the
European Council of Juvenile Justice. More than 70 professionals and
experts from all 27 EU members and representatives of the three
sections of the Council: The Public Administration, Academic Section and
NGOs, participated in this second meeting held in Rome.

Representatives of the Directorate General of Justice of the European
Commission and the Council of Europe: projects of Communication on
the Rights of the Child 2011 - 2014 of the European Commission and
Child Frienfly Justice Guidelines of the Council of Europe .
The Outputs of this second meeting were presented to the European
institutions thrgought three Green Papers.
www.ijjo.org
European Juvenile Justice Council
IJJO Green paper on Child Friendly Justice
Public Administration Section of the EJJC
“The evaluation of the implementation of international
standards in national juvenile justice systems”
A concept paper to justify the JJ Indicators:
- overview of the basic principles of JJ Standards
- EU snapshot of compliance with JJ standards focusing on
the implementation
-age criminal responsibility
- alternative to detention
- nature of deprivation of liberty, etc.
- identifies existing tools and instruments of evaluation
- recommendations to collect and analyze data at EU level
www.ijjo.org
Cédric Foussard
Director
International Juvenile Justice Observatory
cfoussard@oijj.org
www.ijjo.org