IV: CRIME AND CRIMINALITY: THEORITICAL PERSPECTIVES:

Early Explanations of Criminology-Schools of Thought

It has been generally accepted that a systematic study of criminology was first taken up by the
Italian scholar, Ceasare Bonesana Marchese de Becaria (1938-94) who is known as the founder of
modern criminology. His greatest contribution to the science of criminology was that he, for the
first time, proceeded with the study of criminals on a scientific basis and reached certain
conclusions from which definite methods of handling crime and criminals could be worked out.
Thus the theories of criminology or the schools of criminology are of a later origin.
Meaning of the School of Criminology
Edwin Sutherland pointed out that a school of criminology predicts the system of thought which
consists of an integrated theory of causation of crime and of policies of control implied in the
theory of causation. Therefore, a school of criminology implies the following three important
points:
1. The adherents of each school try to explain the causation of crime and criminal behavior in their
own way relying on the theory propounded by the exponent of that particular school.
2. Each school of criminology suggests punishment and preventive measures to suit its ideology.
3. And, each of the school represents the social attitude of people towards crime and criminal in a
given time.
1. The Classical School
The Classical School in criminology is usually a reference to the eighteenth-century work during
the Enlightenment by the utilitarian and social contract philosophers Jeremy Bentham and Cesare
Beccaria. Their interests lay in the system of criminal justice and penology and, indirectly through
the proposition that "man is a calculating animal", in the causes of criminal behaviour. The
Classical school of thought was premised on the idea that people have free will in making
decisions, and that punishment can be a deterrent for crime, so long as the punishment is
proportional, fits the crime, and is carried out promptly.
Beccaria, the pioneer of modern criminology expounded his naturalistic theory of criminality by
rejecting the omnipotence of evil spirit. He laid greater emphasis on mental phenomenon of the
individual and attributed crime to free will of the individual. Thus he was much influenced by the
utilitarian philosophy of his time which placed reliance on hedonism, namely, the pain and
pleasure theory. As Donald Taft rightly put it, this doctrine implied the notion of causation in
terms of free choice to commit crime by rational man seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.

Main Reforms Advocated by the Classical School

The system of law, its mechanisms of enforcement and the forms of punishment used in the
eighteenth century were primitive and inconsistent. Judges were not professionally trained so many
of their decisions were unsatisfactory being the product of incompetence, capriciousness,
corruption or political manipulation. The use of torture to extract confessions and a wide range of
cruel punishments such as whipping, mutilation and public executions were commonplace. A need
for legal rationality and fairness was identified and found an audience among the emerging middle
classes whose economic interests lay in providing better systems for supporting national and
international trade.
John Locke
John Locke considered the mechanism that had allowed monarchies to become the primary form of
government. He concluded that monarchs had asserted the right to rule and enforced it either
through an exercise in raw power, or through a form of contract, e.g. the feudal system had
depended on the grants of estates in land as a return for services provided to the sovereign. Locke
proposed that all citizens are equal, and that there is an unwritten but voluntary contract between
the state and its citizens, giving power to those in government and defining a framework of mutual
rights and duties. In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes wrote, "the right of all sovereigns is derived from
the consent of every one of those who are to be governed." This is a shift from authoritarianism to
an early model of European and North American democracy where police powers and the system
of punishment are means to a more just end.
Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794)
In 1764, Beccaria published Dei Deliti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments") arguing for
the need to reform the criminal justice system by referring not to the harm caused to the victim, but
to the harm caused to society. In this, he posited that the greatest deterrent was the certainty of
detection: the more swift and certain the punishment, the more effective it would be. It would also
allow a less serious punishment to be effective if shame and an acknowledgement of wrongdoing
was a guaranteed response to society's judgment. Thus, the prevention of crime was achieved
through a proportional system that was clear and simple to understand, and if the entire nation
united in their own defence. His approach influenced the codification movement which set
sentencing tariffs to ensure equality of treatment among offenders. Later, it was acknowledged that
not all offenders are alike and greater sentencing discretion was allowed to judges. Thus,
punishment works at two levels. Because it punishes individuals, it operates as a specific
deterrence to those convicted not to reoffend. But the publicity surrounding the trial and the
judgment of society represented by the decision of a jury of peers, offers a general example to the
public of the consequences of committing a crime. If they are afraid of similarly swift justice, they
will not offend.

In his book "On Crimes and Punishments" Beccaria presented a coherent, comprehensive design
for an enlightened criminal justice system that was to serve the people rather than the monarchy.

According to Beccaria, the crime problem could be traced not to bad people but to bad laws. A
modern criminal justice system should guarantee all people equal treatment before the law.
Beccarias book supplied the blue print. That blue print was based on the assumption that people
freely choose what they do and are responsible for the consequences of their behavior. Beccaria
proposed the following principles:

Laws Should Be Used To Maintain Social Contract: Laws are the conditions under which
men, naturally independent, united themselves in society. Weary of living in a continual state of
war, and of enjoying a liberty, which became a little value, from the uncertainty of its duration,
they sacrificed one part of it, to enjoy the rest in peace and security.
Only Legislators Should Create Laws: The authority of making penal laws can only reside
with the legislator, who represents the whole society united by the social compact.
Judges Should Impose Punishment only in Accordance with the Law: [N]o magistrate
then, (as he is one of the society), can, with justice inflict on any other member of the same society
punishment that is not ordained by the laws.
Judges Should not Interpret the Laws: Judges, in criminal cases, have no right to interpret
the penal laws, because they are not legislators.Everyman has his own particular point of view
and, at different times, sees the same objects in very different lights. The spirit of the laws will then
be the result of the good or bad logic of the judge; and this will depend on his good or bad
digestion.
Punishment Should be Based on the Pleasure/Pain Principle: Pleasure and pain are the
only springs of actions in beings endowed with sensibility.If an equal punishment be ordained
for two crimes that injure society in different degrees, there is nothing to deter men from
committing the greater as often as it is attended with greater advantage.
Punishment Should be Based on the Act, not on the Actor: Crimes are only to be measured
by the injuries done to the society they err, therefore, who imagine that a crime is greater or less
according to the intention of the person by whom it is committed.
The Punishment Should be Determined by the Crime: If mathematical calculation could
be applied to the obscure and infinite combinations of human actions, there might be a
corresponding scale of punishment descending from the greatest to the least.
Punishment Should be Prompt and Effective: The more immediate after the commission of
a crime a punishment is inflicted the more just and useful it will be.An immediate punishment is
more useful; because the smaller the interval of time between the punishment and the crime, the
stronger and more lasting will be the association of the two ideas of crime and punishment.
Major Shortcomings of the Classical School
The contribution of classical school to the development of rationalized criminological thinking was
by no means less important, but it had its own pitfalls.

1. The classical school proceeded on an abstract presumption of free will and relied solely on the
act (i.e., the crime) without devoting any attention to the state of mind of the criminal.
2. It erred in prescribing equal punishment for same offence thus making no distinction between
first offenders and habitual criminals and varying degrees of gravity of the offence.
However, the greatest achievement of this school of criminology lies in the fact that it suggested a
substantial criminal policy which was easy to administer without resort to the imposition of
arbitrary punishment. It goes to the credit of Beccaria who denounced the earlier concepts of crime
and criminals which were based on religious fallacies and myths and shifted emphasis on the need
for concentrating on the personality of an offender in order to determine his guilt and punishment.
Beccarias views provided a background for the subsequent criminologists to come out with a
rationalized theory of crime causation which eventually led the foundation of the modern
criminology and penology.

2. Positivists School/The Italian School

The Positivist School has attempted to find scientific objectivity for the measurement and
quantification of criminal behavior. As the scientific method became the major paradigm in the
search for all knowledge, the Classical School's social philosophy was replaced by the quest for
scientific laws that would be discovered by experts. It is divided into Biological, Psychological and
Social.
Biological positivism
If Charles Darwin's Theory of evolution was scientific as applied to animals, the same approach
should be applied to "man" as an "animal".
Physical Characteristics
Historically, medicine became interested in the problem of crime, producing studies of
physiognomy and the science of phrenology which linked attributes of the mind to the shape of the
brain as reveal through the skull. These theories were popular because society and any failures of
its government were not the causes of crime. The problem lay in the propensities of individual
offenders who were biologically distinguishable from law-abiding citizens. This theme was
amplified by the Italian School and through the writings of Cesare Lombroso (see L'Uomo
Delinquente, The Criminal Man and Anthropological criminology) which identified physical
characteristics associated with degeneracy demonstrating that criminals were atavistic throwbacks
to an earlier evolutionary form. Charles Goring (1913) failed to corroborate the characteristics but
did find criminals shorter, lighter and less intelligent, i.e. he found criminality to be "normal" rather
than "pathological" (cf the work of Hooton found evidence of biological inferiority). William
Sheldon identified three basic body or somatotypes (i.e. endomorphs, mesomorphs, and
ectomorphs), and introduced a scale to measure where each individual was placed. He concluded
that delinquents tended to mesomorphy. Modern research might link physical size and athleticism
and aggression because physically stronger people have the capacity to use violence with less
chance of being hurt in any retaliation. Otherwise, such early research is no longer considered
valid. The development of genetics has produced another potential inherent cause of criminality,

with chromosome and other genetic factors variously identified as significant to select heredity
rather than environment as the cause of crime (see: nature versus nurture). However, the evidence
from family, twin, and adoption studies shows no conclusive empirical evidence to prefer either
cause.
Main Distinctions between Classical School and Positive School
The positive school differed from the classical school of criminology in the following manner:
1. Defining Crime: Classical school defined crime in legal terms. Where as, the positive school
rejected legal definition of crime and preferred sociological definition.
2. Explanation of Crime: Classical school placed reliance on free-will theory as an explanation of
crime. Positive school explained crime in terms of biological determination.
3. Nature of Punishment: Classical school believed in deterrent and definite punishment for each
offence and equal punishment for all criminals committing the same offence. Positive school advocated
treatment methods for criminals instead of punishment and held that criminal be punished not
according to gravity of his crime but according to the circumstances associated with it.
The Focus of the School: Classical school focused greater attention on crime, namely, the act rather
than the criminal. Whereas, the positivists laid greater emphasis on personality of the offender rather
than his criminal act.
5. The Founders of the School: The main exponents of classical school were Beccaria and Bentham.
The main exponents of positive school were Lombroso, Ferri and Garofalo.
6. Contribution to the Field: The classical school was an 18th century dogma which attempted to
reform the criminal justice system in order to protect criminals against arbitrary discretion of judges.
The positive school was a 19th century doctrine which emphasized on scientific method of study and
shifted emphasis from crime to criminal and from retribution to corrective methods of treatment.

3. POSITIVIST SCHOOL: SOCIOLOGICAL EXPLAINATION:

1. Disorganization Theory
Current positivist approaches generally focus on the cultural and socio-economic environment to which
a young person has been exposed, and how these conditions may be criminogenic. These theories deemphasize individual agency, and stress criminal behaviour is largely determined by factors outside a
young person's control. Social ecology or social disorganization theory says crime is generated by the
breakdown of traditional values and norms. This was most likely to occur in urban areas with transient
populations and high levels of migration, which would produce the breakdown of family relationships
and community, competing values, and increasing impersonality.
2. Strain theory
Strain Theory is associated mainly with the work of Robert Merton. He felt that there are
institutionalized paths to success in society. Strain theory holds that crime is caused by the difficulty
those in poverty have in achieving socially valued goals by legitimate means. As those with, for
instance, poor educational attainment have difficulty achieving wealth and status by securing well paid
employment, they are more likely to use criminal means to obtain these goals. [4] Merton's suggests five
adaptations to this dilemma:
1. Innovation: individuals who accept socially approved goals, but not necessarily the socially
approved means.

2. Retreatism: those who reject socially approved goals and the means for acquiring them.
Ritualism: those who buy into a system of socially approved means, but lose sight of the goals. Merton
believed that drug users are in this category.
4. Conformity: those who conform to the system's means and goals.
5. Rebellion: people who negate socially approved goals and means by creating a new system of
acceptable goals and means.
A difficulty with strain theory is that it does not explore why children of low-income families would
have poor educational attainment in the first place. More importantly is the fact that much youth crime
does not have an economic motivation. Strain theory fails to explain violent crime, the type of youth
crime which causes most anxiety to the public.
3. Social Learning Theory:
This theory emphasizes the interaction between person and environment, in a quest not so much to
learn why people violate the law but, rather, to identify the conditions under which they might do so.
Development of a particular orientation, criminal or non-criminal, reflects an accumulation of
reinforcements in a variety of situations. Patterson (1980) claims, children do not out grow extreme
anti-social behavior, they remain deviant unless they are punished.
But other social learning theories are more positive, proposing that child-reasoning practices can be
influential, in that the child learns adult behavior patterns, values, and anxieties through observing the
experience of the adulthood. However, the interaction between children and their parents can be a twoway street, in which each changes the behavior of the other.
Imitation, or modeling, serves social-learning theory as one useful way to explain the development of
certain kinds of behavior. Bandura and Walters (1963) showed that personality traits such as
aggression or dependency can be learned through watching others and seeing what kinds of rewards or
punishments they receive for their actions. Responses that lead to valued outcomes (or positive
reinforcement) are likely immulated.
But the learning that takes place may be influenced by the situation in which it occurs or by the
specificity of reinforcements, or rewards. Individuals learn to discriminate one situation from another.
Bandura, in studying the behavior of highly aggressive boys, found that it was often stimulus-bound.
Some of these children had parents who punished the child when he displayed aggression toward them;
at the same time, these parents characteristically acted aggressively themselves and encouraged their
child to do so with his peers. This pattern of behavior produced boys who are showed little aggression
at home but a great deal at school.
In contrast to the differential association type of-psychological approach, some advocates of sociallearning theory see children as active participants in their own socialization
4. Labeling Theory
Labeling theory states that once young people have been labeled as criminal they are more likely to
offend. The idea is that once labelled as deviant a young person may accept that role, and be more
likely to associate with others who have been similarly labelled. (Eadie & Morley: 2003 p.552)
Labelling theorists say that male children from poor families are more likely to be labelled deviant, and
that this may partially explain why there are more lower-class young male offenders. (Walklate: 2003
p. 24)
5. Social-psychological theories( Control and Learning):
Social-psychological explanations of criminality view the criminal behavior, as a learned one acquired
through a process of social interaction. Sometimes they are referred to as Social-process theories, in

order to draw attention to the processes by which an individual becomes a criminal. These explanations
bridge the gap between the unqualified environmentalism of the sociological theories and the narrow
individualism of the psychological and biological approaches. Thus, they stress those reciprocal
transactions between people and their social environments that would explain why some people behave
criminally and others do not.
Social-psychological theories can be divided into two categories:
Control Theories,

Learning Theories.

Control Theories
Control theories assume that the motive to deviate is relatively constant across people, and hence
people will frequently behave antisocially unless they are trained not to. Some never form attachments
or bonds with significant others, so that necessary controls are never internalized. There are two
important theories under these explanations.
Control theory, developed in the 1960s and 1970s, attempts to explain ways to train people to engage in
law-abiding behavior. Although there are different approaches within control theory, they share the
view that humans require nurturing in order to develop attachments or bonds to people and that
personal bonds are key in producing internal controls such as conscience and guilt and external controls
such as shame. According to this view, crime is the result of insufficient attachment and commitment to
others.
Hirschis Model (1969):
The sociologist Travis Hirschi has developed his own control theory that attempts to explain
conforming, or lawful rather than deviant, or unlawful behavior. He stresses the importance of the
individual's bond to society in determining conforming behavior. His research has found that
socioeconomic class has little to do with determining delinquent behavior, and that young people who
are not very attached to their parents or to school are more likely to be delinquent than those who are
strongly attached. He also found that youths who have a strongly positive view of their own
accomplishments are more likely to view society's laws as valid constraints on their behavior.
His explanation stresses four control variables, each of which represents a major social bond:
1. Attachment,
2. Commitment,
3. Involvement, and
4. Belief.
These variables explain the social bondage i.e. attachment to others in the society. Particularly, young
people are bonded to the society at several levels. However, the extent and strength of such bondage
differ in the following ways:

The degree to which they are affected by the opinions and expectations by others.
The payoffs they receive for conventional behavior, and

The extent to which they subscribe to the prevailing norms.

As represented in the work of Travis Hirschi, the Social Control Theory proposes that exploiting the
process of socialization and Social Learning Theory builds self-control and reduces the inclination to
indulge in behaviour recognized as antisocial. It is based on Functionalist theories of crime and
proposes that there are three types of control:

 Direct: by which punishment is threatened or applied for wrongful behaviour, and compliance is

rewarded by parents, family, and authority figures.

Indirect: by which a youth refrains from delinquency because his or her delinquent act might cause

pain and disappointment to parents and others with whom he or she has close relationships.
Internal: by which a person's conscience or sense of guilt prevents him or her from engaging in

delinquent acts.

V1: Juvenile justice in Pakistan

Juvenile justice in Pakistan deals with crimes committed by Pakistani children. The minimum
age for criminal responsibility in Pakistan is seven years. According to a SPARC report published
in 2012 there were 1500 to 2000 juveniles (under-18 children) imprisoned in Pakistan. This figure,
however, excludes thousands of under trials whose number is unknown. Anees Jillani opines that
one of the reasons for the large number of children coming into conflict with the law is the low age
of criminal responsibility, which is seven years under section 82 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860
(No XLV) Additionally, section 83 of the Pakistan Penal Code says that nothing is an offense
which is done by a child above seven years of age and under the age of twelve, who has not
attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of his or her
conduct on that occasion
In July 2000, the then government under General Pervez Musharraf enacted the JSSO (Juvenile
Justice System Ordinance 2000)(No XXII), according to SPARC(2001) its implementation is
incomplete. A survey of juvenile prisoners lodged in 51 jails in the four provinces of Pakistan
exposed most degrading conditions. Hardly any facilities existed for rehabilitation and often the
punishment was too severe for the crimes committed. Most of the incarcerated children were found
to be under-trials. Under-trial prisoners failed to obtain release on bail as their poverty prevented
them from furnishing sureties.

Juvenile Justice Legislation In 2000, Pakistan introduced the Juvenile Justice System
Ordinance (JJSO),344 with the intention of establishing a comprehensive, country-wide
juvenile justice system. Prior to that, only two provinces Sindh and Punjab - had separate
juvenile justice legislation.345 The JJSO overrides the provincial laws to the extent that
they conflict.
All provinces have now established rules under the new JJSO and are in the process of
implementing them. In addition, ongoing law reform and review is underway to further
improve the juvenile justice system. A new national Child Protection Law has been drafted,
which would address both children in conflict with the law and children in need of
protection.
In December 2004, the Lahore High Court struck down the JJSO on the grounds that it was
impracticable and unconstitutional. The judgment stated that the ban on the death
penalty for juveniles led to children being used by adults to carry out capital offences. The
court also commented that the choice of 18 for the definition of a juvenile was as
arbitrary. It opined that the socio-economic conditions, hot climate and exotic and spicy

food in Pakistan all contribute towards a speedy physical growth and an accelerated
maturity of understanding of a child in our society. This decision is currently under appeal.
Scope and Jurisdiction
Currently, the minimum age for criminal responsibility is seven, though children between
the ages of seven and 12 are only held criminally responsible if determined by the Court to
have sufficient maturity to understand the consequences of their actions. The UN
Committee on the Rights of the Child has expressed concern that this age is far too low.
The JJSO extends juvenile justice protections to all children in conflict with the law who
were under the age of 18 at the time the offence was committed (previously 16 under
provincial laws). However, the Ordinance does not yet apply to the Federally Administered
Tribal Areas (FATA) or the Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (PATA) due to
provisions in the Constitution of Pakistan, which states that no act of Parliament shall apply
to these areas until it is directed as such by the President of Pakistan. The President has yet
to make this declaration, and as a result children in these two areas do not have the
protection of the JJSO.
Another concern is that the Hudood Laws of 1979, which applies to specific offences
including rape, adultery, use of alcohol and drugs, theft, armed robbery and slander,
overrides both the Penal Code and the JJSO, including the minimum age provisions. The
Hudood Laws include strict fixed punishments for certain crimes once adequate evidence is
obtained. These fixed punishments known as hadd include stoning to death for
fornication, judicial amputation for theft and armed robbery, and flogging for consumption
of intoxicants. Although the hadd punishments may not be imposed on individuals
convicted of crimes as children, the definition of a child in Hudood law is simply a person
who has not attained puberty. Thus, a girl of 12 who has attained puberty is legally adult,
and could be sentenced to hadd punishment under the Hudood laws. This is a matter for
concern, as the JJSO.

1. Role of Police
Powers of Arrest and Arrest Procedures

The JJSO contains some new and important protections for children who have been subject
to arrest. Children cannot be arrested under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code
permitting preventative detention. The use of handcuffs and fetters is prohibited, unless
there is reasonable apprehension that the child may escape from custody. The officer in
charge of the police station where the child is detained must as soon as possible inform the
childs guardian, if s/he can be found, of the childs arrest and the date/time/location of the
Juvenile Court before which the child will be produced. The officer must also inform a
probation officer to enable him/her to obtain information about the juveniles background
and circumstances. Notably, the Ordinance does not explicitly give either the childs
guardian or the probation officer the right to be present when the child is being questioned
by the police.
In practice, these provisions have yet to be fully enforced. There are continued reports of
police abuse of children, and of the denial of access to parents, probation officers and legal
representation. A situational analysis undertaken by the NCCWD in 2001 revealed that 80%

of the juveniles interviewed had been handcuffed on arrest, and physical abuse by police
during arrest was common. Sixty- Eight percent said that police forced them to confess
guilt. Furthermore, police reportedly use false arrests to extort bribes from children and
their families. Children from families who can pay bribes are released, while almost all of
those that remain accused, arrested and detained are poor children and street children. In
many cases, after undergoing investigation and beating by police, children are released
without being charged or produced before a magistrates.
The JJSO states that a child who is accused of non-bailable offence must be brought before
the Juvenile Court within 24 hours from arrest.354 However, in practice, this time limit is
not always met.355 Children interviewed as part of the NCCWD study spent, on average,
17 days in police lock-up, ranging from one day to five months, and 30% said they were
not allowed visitors.356 While in police lock-up, children are regularly kept with adults and
have to remain in closed quarters up to 24 hours per day. Conditions are unhygienic and it
is uncommon for lock-ups to provide bedding or blankets. The JJSO does not contain any
requirement that children be separated from adults whenever they are in custody or
detention.
2. Juvenile Court and Trial Proceedings
The JJSO requires Provincial governments to establish one or more Juvenile Courts, or to
designate a Court of Sessions or Judicial Magistrate to exercise the power of the Juvenile
Court. The Juvenile Court must not take up any other cases on the same day as a juvenile
case. The proceedings must be closed to the public, and the media is prohibited from
publishing any information that may identify the child unless the Juvenile Court
specifically authorises it. Every child who is accused of an offence has the right to legal
assistance at the expense of the State.
The JJSO does not provide any guidance as to the conduct of Juvenile Court proceedings,
or the presence of the childs parents. Provisions permitting the Court to dispense with
attendance of the child when satisfied that attendance of the child is not essential for the
purpose of the trial are not consistent with the childs right under the CRC to participate in
any judicial decisions that affect him/her, and to due process.
To date, separate Juvenile Courts have only been established in Lahore and Karachi. All
other provinces have conferred special powers to hear juvenile cases on senior judicial
magistrates of the regular courts. However, due to Court backlogs and heavy caseloads,
many of these judges are also assigned adult cases. Cases involving children are not
systematically separated and scheduled differently than those involving adults, resulting in
childrens cases being tried on the same day, in an adult environment. Children are mixed
with adults both while they are being transported from detention to Court, and while
waiting in the Court holding cells. In some areas they are brought into court in chains or
tied together with a rope.

Sentencing
The JJSO states that a probation officer must assist the Juvenile Court by making a report about the
childs character and background.373 The Ordinance also includes some new sentencing powers,
designed to give Courts alternatives to imprisonment. The Court may:

release the child on probation under the care of a parent, guardian or any suitable person
executing a bond with/out surety;

place the child in a borstal institution until 18 years or for the period of imprisonment
stipulated for the offence, whichever is earlier;

reduce period of imprisonment or probation in the case where the court is satisfied that
further imprisonment or probation is unnecessary.

However, these sanctions are merely optional alternatives to the adult penalties stipulated under the
Penal Code, and the Court may still in its discretion impose an adult prison sentence on the child,
including life imprisonment. There is no statement that detention shall be used only as a measures
of last resort, for the shortest appropriate period. On the contrary, the presumption is that children
sent to borstal institutions will remain there until they turn 18, unless the Court considers a lesser
period appropriate.
Importantly, for the first time the JJSO prohibits the death penalty from being imposed on children
under the age of 18.375 However, as noted above, since the JJSO does not apply to federally
administered territories, children are still subject to the death penalty in those areas. The death
sentence continues to be used as a sentencing option for children; in July 2002, two boys were
convicted and put on death row having been sentenced to capital punishment by a court in the Swat
district (PATA) of Pakistan.
Another concern, as noted above, is that the Hudood Laws over-ride the JJSO and therefore
children may be subject to hadd punishments. Hadd punishments are fixed, and include stoning to
death for fornication, judicial amputation for theft and armed robbery and whipping for
consumption of intoxicants. Although the hadd punishments may not be imposed on individuals
convicted of crimes as children, the definition of a child in Hudood law is simply a person who
has not attained puberty. Girls are therefore particularly vulnerable since they generally reach
puberty earlier than boys, and generally below the age of 18. The UN Committee on the Rights of
the Child has expressed concern that the Zina and Hudood Ordinances are in conflict with the
principles and provisions of the CRC.

VII: CRMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM:

The term Criminal Justice refers to an area of knowledge devoted to controlling crime through
the scientific administration of Police, Court and Rehabilitation/Correctional agencies. It is an
interdisciplinary field making use of the knowledge basis of sociology, psychology, law, public
policy and other related fields.
Criminal Justice is essentially an agency of social control, society considers some behaviors so
dangerous and destructive that it choose to either strictly control their occurrance or outlaw them
outright. It is the job of the agencies of justice to prevent these behaviors by apprehending and
punishing transgressors or deterring their future occurrence. While society maintains other forms
of social control, such as parental and school-based discipline, they are designed to deal with moral
and not legal misbehavior. Only the Criminal Justice System maintains the power to control crime
and punish criminals.
A number of academic disciplines have been drawn upon to develop insights into the causes and
prevention of criminal behavior. After taking information from various disciplines and
consolidated as the knowledge base for a new era of study. Understanding what knowledge is
represented in this field helps us to reach a working definition of Criminal Justice study.
The study of criminal Justice may be defined as the use of the scientific method to understand the
Administration Procedures and policies of those agencies of Government charged with enforcing
the law adjudicating crime and correcting criminal conduct. The study of Criminal Justice involves
analyzing how there institutions influence human behavior and how they are in turn influenced by
law and society.

The basic frame work of the Pakistan Criminal Justice System is found in the Legislature, Judicial
and Executives Branches of the Government. The legislature defines the law by determining what
conduct is prohibited and establishes criminal penalties for those who violate the law, the Courts
interpret the law and determine whether it meets constitutional requirements, the executive branch
plans programs, appoints personal and exercise administrative responsibility for Criminal Justice
Agencies. This can be seen herein under:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Legislative Branch
National Assembly Senate
Appeal
Judiciary
Law of the land the public
Validate
Invalidated

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

The state constitution grants authority to pass laws. The primary responsibility of legislatures in the
Justice System is to define criminal behavior and establish criminal penalties. The law making
function involves not only passing bills but also modifying and rejecting them. In addition to
establishing definition of crimes, legislatures also pass laws governing Criminal Justice
Procedures. These include rules and regulations involving the laws of arrest, search warrants, bail,
trial Court proceedings and sentencing. Although the legislature enacts laws, most criminal
procedures are established by the Higher Courts. The initiative to pass a law may come from a
legislator, a criminal justice agency, a public official, or a group of citizens. The issue is first
studied by a legislative committee. Lobbyists and interest group add their influence and knowledge
to the discussion and contents of the proposed bill. The respective legislative houses are
subsequently given the bill for a vote. In Congress and bicameral state legislatures, if the
legislation is not passed in its initial form by both the House of Representatives and Senate, it is
given to a joint legislative committee of both houses to work out a compromise. A compromise bill
is eventually voted on by both bodies. When the bill has been passed, it is given to the chief
executive for his or her signatures. If signed, the bill becomes a law. If vetoed, the bill may be
dropped or referred back to the legislature for reconsideration.

EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Executive Power is vested in such public officials as the President, Governors, Prime Minister and
Chief Ministers. They are often actively involved in criminal Justice issues. They have extensive
power of appointments; they appoint judges and heads of the administration agencies such as
Police Officials, Commissioners and the Chief of other several law enforcing agencies. They have
also the authority to remove administrative Personnel. Another important executive function
involves the power to grant pardons for crimes. The President can pardon the criminal, even if
appeal of a particular criminal is dismissed from the higher appellate Court.
The control and prevention of criminal activity and the treatment and reform of criminal offenders
are carried out by the agencies of Government. These public agencies created to maintain order,
enforce the criminal law, provide emergency services keep traffic on streets and highways moving
freely and create a sense of community safety. First is the Police Department, the system and
process of criminal justice depends on effective and efficient police works, particularly when it
comes to preventing and detecting crime and apprehending and arresting criminal offenders.
Former Chief Justice of USAWarren Burger Stressed that:

The Policemen (or women) on the beat, or in the Petrol car, makes more decisions and exercise
broader discretion affecting the daily lives of people everyday and to a greater extent, in many
respects, than a judge will ordinarily exercise in a week.

THE COURTS
It is the part of the system that is most venerable, the most formally organized and the most
elaborately circumstances by law and tradition. It is the institution around which the rest of the
system has developed and to which the rest of the system is in large measure responsible. It
regulates the flow of the criminal process under governance of the law. It is expected to articulate
the communitys most deeply held, most cherished views about the relationship of individual and
society.

The criminal Courts regulate the process by which the criminal responsibility of defendants
accused of violating the law is determined. The Court is expected to convict and sentenced those
found guilty of crimes while ensuring that the innocent are freed without any consequences and
burden. The entire criminal Court process is undertaken with the recognition that the rights of the
individual should be protected at all times. An accused also has the right to be given due process,
or to be treated with fundamental fairness. This includes the right to be present at trial, to be
notified of the charge(s), to have an opportunity to examine the witness and to have favorable
witness appear.

The District Courts variously called, theCivil Court, Judicial Magistrate,Senior Civil Court, Addl.
District & Sessions Court and District & Sessions Courts. They often dispense routine and
repetitious justice and are burden with a heavy responsibility. They are not generally equipped to
fulfill characterized by cramped Courtrooms, limited personnel, limited number of Judicial Officer,
large number of pending cases, different tactic of lawyers and the habitual litigants, remain a
critical problem in criminal justice administration. The High Court and Supreme Court are
primarily Appellate Courts that do not conduct criminal trial. Question of fact decided in the
original Court are not ordinarily reviewed in the Appellate Courts. These Courts deal with
procedural errors arising in the lower Courts that are considered violations of rights guaranteed by
State or the constitution. The Appellate Court has the authority to affirm, modify or reverse
decision of the lower Criminal Court.
THE PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE.
The prosecutor and the defense attorney are the opponents in what is known as the adversary
system the prosecutor is the public official who represents the Government and present its case
against the accused/defendant, who is charged with a violation of the criminal law. The prosecutor
is known variously as a district attorney, public prosecutor and is appointed by the Government.
The prosecutor is responsible not only for charging the accused with the crime but also for
bringing the case to trial and to a final conclusion. The defense attorney on the other hand, is
responsible for providing legal defense to the accused. This role involves two major functions.

(i) Protecting the constitutional right of the accused, and

(ii) Presenting the best possible legal defense for the accused.

The defense attorney represent a client from initial arrest through the trial stage, during the hearing
and if needed through the process of appeal. Any person accused of a crime can obtain the service
of a private attorney if he or she can afford to do so. The ultimate objection of the adversary system
is to seek the truth, in this way determining the guilt or innocence of the accused from the formal
evidence presented at the trial. The system ensures that the accused is given a fair trial, the relevant
facts of a given case came on record and that an impartial decision is reached.

CORRECTIONS
Following the criminal trial resulting in conclusion and sentencing, the offender enters the
correctional system. The correction involves probation, jails and parole programs for both juvenile
and adult offenders. Complicating this system is the dramatic population explosion in the country,
and minimum numbers of jails. Apart from that jail system suffers from an extremely poor
performance record, many offenders return to crimes shortly after spending their period of
sentence. This is due to the lack of effective treatment and training programmes, poor physical
environment and health conditions and the fact that offenders in many institution/jails are subjected
to violence from other inmates and guards. Some of the major components of correction are
discussed below:
1. PROBATION
Probation is a judicial action that allows the offender to remain in the community, subject to
condition imposed by Court order, under the supervision of probation officer. It enables the
offender to continue working while avoiding the pains of imprisonment. In advance countries,
social services are provided to help the offender adjust in the community; counseling, assistance
from social workers and group treatment, as well as the use of community resources to obtain
employment, welfare and housing etc. are offered to the offender while on probation. In same
countries community based correctional centers have been established for first time offenders
where they live while holding a job or obtaining education.

2. CONFINEMENT
The State reserves the right through the criminal law to hold the criminals in jails. There the jail
authorities classify the prisoners. The inmates are assigned to minimum, medium or maximum
security classes. Maximum security cells have high walls, barred cells, and careful security
measures and have the most dangerous prisoners. Medium class may physically reasonable, more
guarded cells but their inmates require less control and therefore can receive more intensive

treatment; Minimum security may have separate rooms and offer inmates much freedom and good
correctional programs.
3. PAROLE
In our country the parole system is not that much established, but in other advanced countries the
convicted are selected for early release on the condition that they obey a set of restrictive
behavioral rules under the supervision of a parole officer. The main purpose of early release parole
is to help the ex-inmate bridge the gap between institutional confinement and a positive adjustment
within the community.
After their release offenders are supervised by parole authorities who help them find employment,
deal with family and social difficulties and gain treatment for emotional or substance abuse
problems. If the offender violate condition of community supervision, parole may be revoked and
the parole may be sent back to jail for completion of his confinement period. In countries like USA
about 40% of all inmates receive mandatory supervised release.