JUVENILE JUSTICE IN GREECE
By
Calliope D.Spinellis* and Aglaia Tsitsoura **
I.
Introduction : The legal and sociological background
Since 1950, the Penal Code and the Code of Penal Procedure have been the basic texts
for the administration of Criminal Justice in Greece. These texts, drawn up after many years of
preparatory work, were inspired by the prevailing criminal law in the country and procedure as
well as the relevant German, Italian and Swiss penal and criminological theories and practices.
During the half-century of the implementation of these Codes, there have been various
amendments, via new legislative Acts, when new situations or ideas rendered modification
necessary.
The part of the Greek Penal Code (Article 121-133) concerning juvenile justice included
provisions meant to promote assistance to, and re-education and therapy for young offenders,
aged 13-17 years of age. Children under 12 years were treated by educative or therapeutic
measures only. For those of 13 to 17 years old the Penal Code abolished the (previously
accepted) criterion of “discernement” and adopted the idea that the judge must consider, in the
light of circumstances of the committed act and of the personality of the juvenile, if educative
and therapeutic measures would be sufficient to avoid re-offending. In the negative, young
offenders were sentenced to a particular penal sanction.
On the other hand, the Code of Penal Procedure (e.g. articles: 1, 4, 7, 27, 130, 239, 305,
316, 489, and 549) and special Acts setting up the institutions, for instance, of Juvenile Courts
(Acts 5098/1931, 2135/1939, 3315/1955) of probation services for juveniles (Act 2793/1954), of
Societies for the Protection of Minors (decree of July 1943), of Centres for the re-education of
juvenile delinquents and their compulsory primary education (Act 2724/1940, decree 71/ 1973)
preceded or supplemented the provisions of the Codes.
Although, some of the means for implementation of the law were not available (e.g.,
there have never been centres for the scientific observation of the juveniles’ personality) these
provisions set the ground for a modern system of juvenile justice in Greece.
However, during the last decades of the 20th Century and the beginning of the 21st
Century, it became evident that changing socioeconomic factors made the existing legislation
concerning the treatment of juvenile offenders obsolete. Hence, this required revision and –
when necessary –even in depth amendment. Some of these social factors are equally found in the
larger European space:
Urbanization and industrialization modified the living conditions of the
population1; in particular, internal migration resulted in a considerable increase of
the population of the main Greek cities (for example, Athens has now about
* Calliope D.Spinellis. is Professor Emeritus (Criminology-Penology) Section of Penal Sciences. Law School,
University of Athens. Presently she is teaching postgraduate courses at the same institution. National
Representative of the European Union Crime Prevention Network.
** Aglaia Tsitsoura is Former Head of Division of Crime Problems, Council of Europe. Presently she is a
Visiting Professor at Panteion University, Athens.
1
Council of Europe, Transformation sociale et delinquance juvenile, Strasbourg, 1979.
2
-
-
4 millions inhabitants, and Thessalonica – the second biggest city - about one
million);
political and economic changes in Eastern Europe resulted in a great movement of
populations; Greece received an important number of external migrants
(migration rate: 2.35 migrants per 1.000 population), some of them accompanied
by their families;
drug trafficking threatened Greece2, as almost all other European countries, and
was often combined with other forms of delinquent behaviour;
family and community solidarity and control, although still existing in Greece
to a considerable degree, have been weakened3;
It was clear that any revision had to take into account the new ideas and methods
developed during the last decades of the 20th century in the field of criminal justice, such as
restorative justice, community service and care for victims.
These ideas and methods were developed in many texts adopted by international
organizations and especially by the United Nations4 and the Council of Europe5. The European
Union also granted considerable attention to questions relating to juvenile justice and children
victims6.
In 2003, the Greek Parliament adopted Act 3189 / 2003 on the “ reform of the legislation
concerning minors ”. The Act has been incorporated in the Greek Penal Code. The same
procedure was followed with the amendments of certain provisions or additions to the Code of
Penal Procedure. On the other hand, the Act 3064 / 2002, equally incorporated in the Penal Code,
strengthened the protection of juvenile victims. Last but not least, a Bill establishing “ Units for
the Care of Youngsters ” (at risk, delinquents and victims) is in preparation.
II.
Juvenile crime trends in Greece
2
See, e.g. D. Madianou et al., Drugs in Greece, vol III: The use of Narcotic Substances by the General Population,
Athens ,1992, 219 et seq.,(in Greek). and C.D. Spinellis, Drugs. : From the Phenomenon to the Models or the Legal
Policy for Dealing with the Problem , in Festschrift fuer G.-A. Mangagis, (G.Bemman/D.Spinellis Herausgeber),
Athens, 1999, 715-747, and esp.,717-721, (In Greek).
3
For additional demographic, social and economic information see, Dionysios Spinellis/Calliope D.Spinellis,
Greece, Criminal Justice Systems in Europe and North America, HEUNI, Helsinki, 199, 6-8.
4
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and its optional Protocols, United Nations Standard
Minimum Rules for the Administration of Justice (the Beijing Rules), United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention
of Juvenile Delinquency (the Riyad Guidelines), United Nations Rules for the Protection of Youths deprived of their
Liberty, etc.
5
European Convention of Human Rights, Recommendation N° R (87) 20 on social reactions to juvenile
delinquency, Recommendation N° R (88) 6 on social reactions to juvenile delinquency among young people coming
from migrant families, Recommendation Rec (2000) 20 on the role of early psychosocial intervention in the
prevention of criminality, Recommendation Rec (2003) 20 concerning new ways of dealing with juvenile
delinquency and the role of juvenile justice. and Recommendations No R (91) 11 on Sexual exploitation,
pornography, prostitution of and trafficking in children and young persons, and No R (2001) on the protection of
children against sexual exploitation.
6
E.g. on May 2001, the Council established the European Union Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN)(2001
/427/JHA). The EUCPN focuses its efforts in three areas, according to Council Decision :one of them being juvenile
crime. With respect to children victims of sexual exploitation see e.g. the relevant frame-decision concerning
trafficking of human beings (document 8135/02 DROIPEN 26, MIGR 35, 19 April 2002).
3
The absence of systematic self-report surveys in Greece7 compels us to rely on crime
statistics solely, despite the well-known limitations and possible defects of them8.
The Tables, which follow, indicate that juvenile crime is increasing in Greece. However, this
increase is not alarming, if one studies carefully the existing formal statistical data collected by
(a) the Ministry of Public Order: Hellenic Police :offenders known to the Police, and (b) the
Ministry of Justice :offenders convicted by the courts. (Most probable the latter refer to Juvenile
Court data given that Greek Juvenile Courts have exclusive jurisdiction in almost all cases of
minors up to 18 years of age (previously 17) and sometimes, even above that age 9). It should be
noted that the year 1973 is the first year of publication of uniform statistical data covering all
Greece, and 1996 the last year for which such data are published due to a re-organisation and
computerization of the system.
TABLE 1
Offences of minors (7-17 years of age) known to the Police and
adjudicated by the Juvenile Courts
(1973-1996)(Traffic violations included)
Year
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
7
Police
5,948
5,881
5,900
7,041
7,332
7,997
9,480
8,577
8,794
12,272
13,770
12,357
11,456
10,773
10,345
9,060
8,485
15,298
18,535
16,530
17,061
16,530
17,061
17,940
%*
2.9
2,8
3,1
2.7
2.8
3.0
3.1
2.8
2.8
3.6
3.5
3.5
4.1
3.9
3.6
3.1
3.2
4.9
5.6
5.7
5.7
6.1
6.1
6.0
Juvenile Courts
5,566
4,577
6,105
6,498
6,056
5,789
5,216
5,476
5,454
6,762
7,819
8,530
7,374
7,767
8,374
6,393
5,107
6.794
6,317
7,964
6,095
5,469
6,388
5,666
%**
4.9
4.3
5.4
5.8
5.2
5.0
4.3
4.5
4.0
4.8
6.5
7.5
6.8
6.3
6.0
4.8
4.7
6.2
5.6
7.2
6.6
6.5
7.0
6.6
See, however, J.Junger-Tas/J.J.Terlouw? Malclm Klein (eds.), International Self- Report Delinquency Study in
Western European Countries, Chapter on Greece, by C.D.Spinellis, et al. The Dutch Ministry of Justice, 1994, also
C.D.Spinellis. Chaidou/Serasis, Victim Theory and Research in Greece, in Kaiser/Kury/Albrecht (Eds.,) Victims and
Criminal Justice. Victimological Research: Stocktaking and Prospects, 1991, 123-158,
8
A.Pitsela, Penal Reaction to the criminality of Minors, 5th ed., Athens /Thessaloniki, 2004,474-475.
9
Sometimes, even young adults may be adjudicated by Juvenile Courts, if they have committed the offence before
the age of 17 (now 18) and due to court delay, they are brought to court when they are young adults..
4
* Percentage of the total of alleged offenders known to the Police with known age.
** Percentage of the total of persons convicted.
Source: A. Pitsela, Penal Reaction to the criminality of Minors, 5th ed., Athens /Thessaloniki, 2004, 471.
Table 1 indicates a considerable increase in the offences known to the Police for the age
brackets 7-1710 (more than 200% between the years 1973 and 1996). This increase, however, is
not reflected in the Juvenile Court statistics. (Increase by 1.7% only). This could be explained
with the help of the realist theory stating that statistics are the reflection of the production of the
criminal justice system. Thus, statistics give us nothing more than the number of cases that the
Juvenile Courts had the capacity to handle during a particular year 11. On the other hand, one
could also argue that the above Police statistics are closer to reality and the number of offences
committed by juveniles did increase significantly because during this period Greece has
experienced abrupt social changes and, as already pointed out, an attempt to computerize
criminal justice. (Change 1973-1976: from 2.9% to 6.0 % or 106.8%).
Because the data of Table 1 cover the years 1973-1996 an attempt is made in Table 2 to
add some recent figures, in spite of the fact that Table 2 does not include comparable data: i.e.
the years 7-12 are not covered. This, however, is not very important as children of this age
bracket commit few offences12.
TABLE 2
Offences of adolescents (13-17 years of age) known to the Police
(only violations of special laws) and adjudicated by the Juvenile Courts and TOTAL
(1992-2002)(Traffic violations included)
VIOLATIONS OF
SPECIAL LAWS ONLY
YEAR Known to
POLICE
1992
17.544
1993
16,111
1994
13,857
1995
14,674
1996
15,816
1997
17,760
1998
17,730
1999
19,130
2000
21,174
2001
23,206
2002
21,964
NA = no data available
10
Reported by
COURTS
6,541
5,080
4,321
4,894
4,112
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
TOTAL (ALL VIOLATIONS)
Reported by
POLICE
20,016
18,481
16,183
16,706
17,571
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Reported by
COURTS
7,813
5,944
5,169
6,,064
5,380
19,955
19,809
21,350
22,591
25,867
23,086
The changes of the law which increased the age limits from 7-17 to 8-18are not reflected in these statistics.
A.Keith Bottomley, Criminology in Focus, Oxford, 1979, 23.
12
Latest data covering five years: 1999-2003, give an average of less than 500 offences per year (432.8).
11
5
Source: N.E.Courakis, Law of Delinquent Minors, Athens/Komotini, 2004, 187 (in Greek). (Only part of
the Courakis’ data appears in the above Table).
Table 2 is in accordance with the data of Table 1 until the year 1996. However, when
unpublished statistics are included, an inexplicable (at the first glance) change occurs.
Most recent data of the years 1999-2003 (Tables 3 and 4) reveal that the increased figures of
reported juvenile crime and delinquency - around or above 20,000 that appear after 1997 – are
consistent, despite the big gap between the years preceding 1997 and following them.
TABLE 3
Offenders 7-17 years of age Greeks and foreigners known to Police
(1999-2003)
Year
7-12
13-17
Greeks
Foreigners
Males
Females
7-17
7-17
7-17
7-17
1999
463
21784
20,811
1,435
20,470
1,777
2000
489
23,572
22,461
1,600
21,557
2,504
2001
545
25,629
24,459
1,716
23,945
2,229
2002
455
25,936
24,373
2,016
24,183
2208
2003
212
21,627
19,810
1,019
20,281
1,558
Source: Ministry of Public Order (Unpublished data) (Table is constructed by C.D.Spinellis)
Total
22,247
24,061
26,174
26,391
21.839
TABLE 4
Most prevalent crimes* known to the Police: Offenders 7-17 years of age (1999-2003)
Offences
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Change
20001999
-50.0%
-20.0%
42.1%
Change
20012000
Change
20022001
Change
20032002
Homicide
6
3
Assault
34
27
28
36
17
3.7%
28.5%
-52.7%
Serious
83
118
71
56
59
-39.8% -21.1& 5.3%
theft
Begging
233
258
152
55
-100. %
-41.0% -63.8%
Theft
771
544
680
748
547
-29.4% 25.0%
10.0%
-26.8%
Robbery
50
9
23
27
23
-82.0% 155.5% 17.3%
-14.8%
Drugs
283
193
112
119
113
-31.8% -41.9
6.2%
-5.0%
Illegal
136
180
102
104
129
32.3%
-43.3% 1.9%
24.0%
entry*
Illegal
108
123
89
75
3
13.8%
-27.6% -15.7% -96.0%
games
Accomplice 59
73
57
52
81
23.7%
-21.9% -8.7%
55.7%
to theft
Traffic
19,786 25,083 25,122 24,860 20,806 26.7%
0.1%
-1.0%
-16.3%
violations
*In the Table, with the exception of homicide, are included offences whose reported figure, in the year
1999, was 30 and over.
Source: Ministry of Public Order (Table is constructed by C.D.Spinellis)
6
Tables 3 and 4 covering the five-year period: 1999-2003 contain detailed information
concerning the age, gender and nationality-ethnicity of offenders, as well as the seriousness of
offences known to the Police.
Careful reading of all the Tables reveals the following:
The fluctuations of the offences known to the Police, especially after 1997, are
more consistent over the years than those of the Courts, and the former indicate a
continuous increase, with the exception of 2003; however, from the outset it has
to be emphasized that 90% of the offences are traffic violations, (Tables 1, 2, and
4);
the overwhelming majority of offences allegedly committed by juveniles belong
to the category of special laws (Nebengesaetze) which do not include property
crimes or crimes against persons but traffic violations, violations of drug laws,
violations concerning illegal entry into the country, violation of laws regulating
illegal electronic games, etc. (Table 4);
the most prevalent offences known to the Police for persons 7-17 are: (a) traffic
violations (circa 90%), (b) theft (less than 4%), (c) violations relating to drugs
(drug use included), and begging (both less than 2%), and finally (d) involvement
in illegal games and illegal entry into the country (circa 1%) of the total offences
reported (Table 4);
the fluctuations of the particular offences during the examined five year period do
not suggest remarkable changes, and some of them are related with the
intensified, for various reasons, police practices during a specific period (e.g.
begging, illegal entry into the country), (Table 4);
the offences that are attributed to persons 7-17 years of age seem to be under
control as they represent no more than 6% -7% of the total number of crime
reported (Table 1);
males are responsible for approximately 90% of the reported offences (Table 3);
minors belonging to the age bracket 7-12 are responsible for no more than 2% of
the total offences reported (Table 3);
Foreigners, on the average, are responsible for 6% of the total crime attributed to
juveniles 7-17 years of age; however, since the total foreign population in Greece
is estimated to be no more than 1,000,000, the population of the relevant age
bracket should be around 300,000 and the 6% shows an overrepresentation of
foreigners (Table 3), and last but not least
the abruptly increased figures of the court statistics (Table 2 shows an increase of
almost 200% between the years 1992 and 2002 (i.e.195.5%) 13; this is in
accordance with the increase of offences known to police). (Tables 2 and 3).
III.
Leading philosophy of the new Greek legislation concerning minors
Acts 3189 / 2003 and 3064 / 2002 do not contradict the philosophy of the previous
provisions of the Greek Penal Code concerning minors but, in a spirit of continuation, enrich
13
This increase is approaching that of the data known to the police between 1973 and 1996.
7
such philosophy in the light of new ideas developed in this field. The main directing principles of
these provisions remain:
The respect of the individual rights and interests of the minor;
The prevention of delinquent behaviour by means of adequate mainly noncustodial measures of assistance, education and treatment.
Novelties and modifications brought in the new provisions are the following:
1.Increase of both the minimum and maximum year that the Juvenile Court has
jurisdiction and abolition of the distinction between “children” and “adolescents”
The 7-17 years age bracket has been dysfunctional. The minimum age has been construed by
case law as 6 years and one day and the age of 17 was not in accordance with the end of minority
status. Thus, in the new provisions, the age limits are stated clearly and they refer to the 8th and
18th birthday. Furthermore. the new Act abolishes the term “criminal” with respect to minors.
Finally, in the rules the terms “child and adolescent” are not used mainly for two reasons: The
term “ child” in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which as of 1992 became
national law in Greece (Act 2101/1992) covers the ages 0-18 years and misunderstandings might
be created since “a child”, under the Penal Code, was the person of 7-12 years of age. The
second reason is based on the finding that maturity varies among individuals – especially minors
- some of them being, from a mental or psychological point of view, less developed or more
developed than what their real age indicates. Thus, the new provisions refer, when necessary, to
the age limits of the minors concerned, instead of the label “adolescent”.
2.
Age of penal responsibility
According to the new rules juveniles of 8 – 13 years of age are not penally liable. Those
of 13 years (completed) to 18 years are penally liable in exceptional cases. According to these
amendments (a) children of less than 8 years of age who violate the penal law are now under the
jurisdiction of welfare services, and (b) youngsters above 17 and below 18 are under the
jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court and are neither referred to the Criminal Courts nor are they
sentenced to adult penal sanctions. This is in accordance with modern views concerning penal
treatment of young adults. With the adoption of the age limit of 18 year, the Juvenile Courts,
sometimes due to court delays, may have jurisdiction on youngsters older than 18 years. This
might happen, since the jurisdiction of the Juvenile Court depends not on the age that the minor
has at the moment of the hearing but on the age that the offender had, when he/she committed
the act.
3.
Diversion - Restorative justice
These procedures – new in the Greek legislation concerning children of 8-18 years of age
– have been developed in most countries in the last decades. The dubious success of penal
measures, the stigmatization of the convicted person, the need for diminishing the workload of
the criminal justice system are among the factors which led theoreticians and practitioners of the
penal and criminological field to seek solutions to the conflict created by the offence in a
8
dialogue and conciliation between the author of the offence and the victim14. Intervention of a
mediator or of the prosecutor facilitates this dialogue that results in reparation of the damage
suffered by the victim and the abandonment of prosecution. Measures of diversion are now
provided both in the Penal Code (Art. 122 e) and in the Code of Penal Procedure (see below, IV,
A, e)
4.
Increase of non-custodial measures
Although such measures existed already in the Penal Code of 1950 15, new ones such as
placing the minor in a foster family or community service are introduced16. Non-institutional
treatment have become the rule.
5.
Abolition of indeterminate sentences
Such sentences have been recently abolished in most countries in order to safeguard the
individual rights of juveniles.
6.
Promotion of the care to victims
Measures, reflecting the wide movement for the protection of victims include:
a)
Compensation of the victim as an educative measure imposed on the adjudicated
offender;
b)
Measures for the protection of child victims (0-18 years of age) of certain serious
offences such as trafficking of human beings and crimes against sexual freedom.
It can be said that the revised provisions grant the offenders an active role in their
treatment and incite them to develop a feeling of responsibility for their own development.
However, this perspective should take into account the specific difficulties of certain categories
of juveniles such as those coming from migrant families. Special structures for assistance to
these juveniles should be a necessary condition for the success of the new legislation.
The creation of an “Ombudsman for the Child” is also an important step in this direction (Act.
3094 /2003,” The Ombudsman and other provisions)17
IV.
Measures and sanctions in particular
14
A.Tsitsoura, Mediation en matiere penale, Nouvelles perspectives de politique criminelle. In: volume to honour
Prof.Dr.Dionysios Spinellis, Athens/Komotini, 2001, 1145 et seq.
15
A.Tsitsoura, Community Sanctions and Measures. In: H.-J.Albrecht/A.Kalmhout , Community Sanctions and
Measures in Europe and North America, 2002, 271 et seq.,
Art. 1 of this Act provides: “ The independent authority entitled "The Ombudsman", has as its mission to mediate
between citizens and public services, local authorities, private and public organizations as defined in article 3, para.
1 of this Act, with the view to protecting citizens' rights, combating misadministration and ensuring respect of
legality. The Ombudsman also has the mission of defending and promoting children's rights.” (Emphasis ours).
17
9
A.
Educative measures (art.122 P.C.)
These measures are applicable to all minors 8 to 18 years of age (unless, those aged 13 to
18 years are penally liable because of the commission of a serious penal offence).
Such measures are:
a)
A reprimand, a warning administered by the Juvenile Court Judge during the
hearing
(art. 122, 1 a. P.C.);
b)
placing the minor under the responsible supervision (custody) of parents or
guardians (art. 122, 1 b. P.C.) – this provision may be supplemented by a sanction
in case the parents fail to deter their child from prostitution or the commission of
an offence (art.360 Penal Code);
c)
placing the minor under the responsible supervision of a foster family
(art. 122, 1 c. P.C.)
d)
placing the minor under the responsible supervision of: i/ a “society for the
protection of minors”, ii/ an institution for the education of minors or iii/ a
probation officer, the so-called “supervisor of minors”.
(art. 122, 1 d. P.C.)
e)
mediation between the minor and his/her victim(s) through the intervention of
probation officers of the Juvenile Court or by the Prosecutor for Minors (art. 122,
1 e., P.C.) In conjunction with the new art. 549, 5 Code of Penal Procedure which
states that the Public Prosecutor for Minors eo ipso takes care of the enforcement
of all decisions of the Juvenile Courts (1st instance and Courts of Appeal) as well
as of the execution of all educative and therapeutic measures).
In Greece,
mediation societies or individual mediators do not exist at present, but
this task is undertaken by the probation officers for minors employed by the
Ministry of Justice and working in every Juvenile Court.
It is to be noted that Art. 45A of the Code of Penal Procedure provides that in the
case of petty offences or misdemeanours committed by a minor, the Prosecutor may
refrain from the exercise of the prosecution if he is convinced, in the light of the
circumstances of the act and of the character of the offender that such prosecution is not
necessary to avoid the commission of new offences. One or more educative measures
may be imposed on minors or they may be required to pay of a sum to a non-profit
institution.
f)
g)
payment of compensation to the victims or reparation of the damage by any other
means (art 122, 1, f, P.C.);
community service by the minor (art 122, 1, g., P.C.) It is expected that inciting
the minor to contribute to the welfare of the community may have an educative
value.
The consent of the minor or of his/her parents is not necessary (although efforts
will be made by the Court to find a consensus, given that intense opposition of the
10
h)
i)
j)
k)
l)
minor would result in an ineffective measure);
participation of the minor in social or psychological programmes in public,
municipal or private services (Art 122, 1, h., P.C.);
professional or other training (art. 122, 1, i. P.C.) - such training would aim at
developing the minors’ personality, to achieve their vocational training
and divert him/her from delinquent activities;
traffic education (art. 122, 1, j., P.C.) – an important measure, given the great
number of traffic violations;
intensive probationary supervision (122, 1, k., P.C.);
placing the minor in a public, municipal or private educational institution (122, 1,
l., P.C.) – this measure may be enforced only to boys, since there is only one such
public institution and since no institutions set up by NGOs, the Church or the
municipality exists.
Interestingly enough various supplementary conditions may accompany the above
measures. According to the explanatory report of Act 3189/ 2003 modalities of the above
measures should be discussed by the competent authority and the minor. The latter should be
personally responsible for the compensation of the victim.
B.
Therapeutic measures (art.123 P.C.)
Therapeutic measures concern minors, who are in need for a particular treatment because
of a mental or an organic disease, causing dysfunction as well as those who are alcoholic or drug
users or present mental retardation or difficulties in developing moral and ethical values.
With regard to these minors, the Juvenile Court may order educative measures (under b
and c) or:
participation in an open or day-care therapeutic programme
placement in a therapeutic or other adequate closed institution.
These measures are ordered after diagnosis and advice by a specialised team of doctors,
psychologists and social workers. The psychiatric expertise is necessary for habitual drug users
before deciding on the applicable therapeutic measures. The provision of the diagnostic team
solves the previous problem of the absence of a diagnostic center for the personality of minors.
Such diagnostic teams exist in Public Children’s Hospitals and Day Care Centres.
C.
Detention in a special institution for persons 13-18 years of age (art.127 P.C.)
Detention in a special institution can be imposed when the Juvenile Court, taking into
account the circumstances of the offence and the personality of the juvenile offender, considers
that a penal sanction is necessary to deter persons belonging to the age bracket 13-18 from reoffending, orders a “Special Detention Institution for Youngsters”. (art. 127 P.C.). This measure
is of a determinate duration.
Two such special institutions operate in Greece: one in Avlona, some kilometers away from
Athens, and one in Volos - the former covering the needs of southern Greece and the latter those
11
of the northern part of the country. In the institution of Avlona on 1 October 2004 were detained:
224 juveniles, and in that of Volos: 76- the capacity of these institutions is 308 for the former
and 65 for the latter18. The above figures indicate that judges follow the principle that custodial
sanctions should be the ultimum refugium.
The explanatory report of Act 3189 / 2003 specifies that although detention in such a
“Special Institution” is a penal sanction and not an educative measure: the institution’s its aim is
essentially educative and it tends to promote the social reintegration of the detainees.
D.
Measures for young adults (art.133 P.C.)
The adult penal court may impose a relatively milder penal sanction with regard to young
adults who have committed a crime after their 18th birthday and before their 21st birthday. Young
adults who have committed an offence before the age of 18 and who are tried after their 18th
birthday, due to delays in the administration of juvenile justice, are tried by the Juvenile Court
and measures or sanctions provided for persons 8 -18 years of age may be imposed.
V.
Protection of victims 0-18 years of age
Act 3064 / 2002 (incorporated in various articles of the Penal Code) deals with the
protection of victims 0-18 years of age but in general with all victims of human trafficking.
These victims attracted particular attention of both policy makers and the public during the
recent years. They are victims of so-called crimes against sexual self-determination or of
trafficking in human beings, i.e. trafficking with the objective of sexual- or work exploitation or
selling human organs.
The aforementioned Act also covers in particular pornography using children and cyber
child pornography as well as advertisements facilitating child prostitution. It is worth noticing
that sexual crimes against children may be prosecuted ex officio. Most of these crimes are
punished even if committed outside the country by an offender of Greek nationality.
Moreover, most crimes committed by adults against minors are punished as felonies; the
clients of child prostitutes are punished as well. Furthermore, agencies, shops, clubs etc.,
facilitating child pornography or trafficking are submitted to administrative sanctions (e.g.
suspension or withdrawal of premises’ license).
Finally, a Presidential Decree 233 / 2003 specifies the measures of assistance: (a) medical,
(b) psychological, (c) legal via a special ‘legal assistant’ for victims available throughout the
legal proceedings, (d) educational, (e) protection of witnesses in trials concerning the above
offences, (f) avoidance of repatriation in case of foreign victims, (g) equal protection of all
victims - Greeks and foreigners, etc.,
The draft law on “Units for the Care of Youngsters” will expand these provisions and
will specify the means for implementing this multifaceted assistance to victims (see below).
VI.Units for the Care of Youngsters (young adults up to 21 years of age are included)
18
Unpublished Statistics of the Ministry of Justice.
12
A Bill on the “Units for the Care of Youngsters” is pending. The main characteristics of
this future enactment, which concerns children at risk, offenders, drug addicts, delinquents with
psychological or mental problems and victims are:
emphasis on the physical and psychological well-being as well as the fulfillment
of the best interest and welfare of youngsters,
safeguarding the rights of the youngsters served (inter alia: provisions for
interpreters, procedures for complaints), and avoiding their stigmatization and social
exclusion while imposing certain reasonable duties to them;
setting up a variety of Units: open, semi-open or closed institutions, hospitality
homes for victims, youngsters at risk and released delinquents, out-patient
therapeutic Units for diagnosis or treatment - Units for the social integration of
delinquents, a special section for minors in the existing model Therapeutic Centre
for the treatment of adult drug users or addicts;
provision for a global scheme of a sufficient number of interrelated and integrated
facilities for persons (males and females) 8 to 21 years of age to be located in
various parts of the country (in this scheme the existing ones are included) – the
innovative element of this Bill is that not all of the institutions will be set up at
once; every time that a special need arises one or more of the already rationally
and globally planned institutions will be established;
licensing and supervision by the Ministry of Justice of all institutions offering
services for the above categories and operating under the auspices of the local
government, NGOs etc. – institutions operating under the auspices of the Ministry
of Health and Solidarity are excluded;
yearly evaluation of all Units, old and new ones.
VII.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The new Greek legislation concerning Juvenile Justice appears to be in conformity with
the principle of protection of children mentioned in the Greek Constitution (art. 21), the
European Convention on Human Rights as well as with the other main conventions and
recommendations of international organizations and in particular those of the United Nations, the
Council of Europe and the European Union.
The measures provided are mostly of a non-institutional character. Diversion and
mediation are introduced. The institution of the Ombudsman for the Child has been introduced.
Particular attention is given to the protection of victims.
However, the reorganization of services for the implementation of new provisions
(see IV) will require a considerable effort.
Social services for Juvenile Justice are at present under-equipped and the personnel is
lacking adequate experience - especially in certain sectors, such as diversion or community
service. Professional staff must be increased and the involvement of voluntary workers – rather
rare in Greece, with the exception of those assisting in the Olympic Games – must be
encouraged.
Particular attention must be given to the training of personnel. It would be desirable to
have specialized social work trainers coming to Greece to help Greek staff to familiarize itself
with new methods. This solution seems preferable to sending staff abroad, because the number of
13
persons benefiting from fellowships would be necessarily limited. Instead, a relatively lengthy
seminar in Greece by experienced trainers from European countries with an advanced system of
administering restorative justice and non- custodial measures would benefit a considerable
number of trainees. In addition, the trainers would have the opportunity to evaluate the needs and
the possibilities in situ. The co-operation of international organizations for the planning,
structuring and possibly financing of such training must be envisaged.
Together with the reorganization of services, a particular effort must be deployed to
inform the public, to accept and collaborates in the new measures provided by the legislation.
Many of these measures are not familiar to the Greek public and may be misinterpreted
either as repressive or humiliating (e.g., community service) or as too lenient (e.g., diversion or
in particular mediation). Thus intensive information campaigns, through mass media or other
means (conferences, publications) is necessary for the success of such measures.
Finally, the new legislation and its implementation should be the object of evaluation
from the beginning of its implementation. A research group should be set up to follow the
experience and assess periodically the progress of the implementation of the new legislation, the
problems presented and the solutions found or desirable. The evaluation of the impact of new
legislation in the evolution of offences committed by persons aged 8-18 in Greece would also be
necessary after some years of implementation (crime proofing). Last but not least, the
improvement of crime statistics and the introduction of periodic Crime Surveys are urgently
needed.