The Juvenile Justice System: Rehabilitation vs Punishment

In the eyes of the law, age is more than the numbers; in fact, it determines how juvenile cases are handled on a routine basis, whether the system leans towards rehabilitation or punishment. The Juvenile Justice System is made to tackle the legal needs and challenges faced by minors with the law. In Pakistan, the Juvenile Justice System Act 2018 provides a proper framework for the prevention and rehabilitation of Juvenile offenders from the conflict with the law. The Juvenile Justice System has now become an essential part of the advancement of the rule of law and the general welfare of society. On one hand, punishment reflects a deep desire for accountability and a belief that harsh consequences discourage future crimes. On the contrary, a growing body is still learning that they have not attained the age of majority, or they are susceptible to their environmental influences, and it shapes their mind towards society. Thus, it is imperative to know the difference; Punitive purpose is to deter juvenile crimes, while rehabilitation confronts developmental needs and provides a sustainable way to reduce recidivism.

The proponents of the punitive approach focus on the three main justifications while handling the juvenile cases. First, Deterrence: This approach believes that harsh punishments can deter the offender and the public from committing the same crime in the future[1]. Second, Retribution: It focuses on the offenders who commit a crime should be punished for the act done[2]. Third, Incapacitation or prevention: It focuses on restricting the criminals freedom and preventing the crime by removing offenders ability to commit further crimes, through imprisonment or in serious cases by death penalty[3]. These approaches resonate in high profile cases but when it comes to Juveniles cases despite its intuitiveness it fails to achieve. Moreover punitive steps ignore the social determinants like poverty, family problems, abuse and lack of educational opportunities. Unless the problem is eradicated from its root, the punishment is useless. Solitary confinement is common practice in the US jails and prisons[4]. The young offenders sometimes shifted with the adults and were treated like them in the imprisonment. There are many harsh realities facing the youth in the prisons, they  lose control and harm themselves with such a long isolation. There is no concept of rehabilitation as it confines them a lot and it changes nothing in their behaviors.

The rehabilitation perspective treats the root causes of delinquency rather than only punishing the juvenile offenders. The juvenile justice system view the young offenders as not irredeemable criminals but as developing individuals who need the proper support. Since adolescents’ brains are still maturing biologically and psychologically, they are highly receptive to positive interventions and vulnerable to negative labelling. It focuses on programs like education, mental health, vocational training and restorative justice practices. Criminal activities can be intervention by educating and working on their social needs or most importantly trauma, anxiety and behavioral disorders can be reduced by educating the juvenile offenders. Vocational training helps the youth with practical skills and it reduces the allure of illicit income and restorative justice helps the offenders to realize the offenders impact on the victims and their families it fosters empathy towards the victims. The UK and developed countries worldwide established adolescent psychiatry and child forensic to discipline incorporating legal and psychiatric fields. It is considered a superior approach dealing with the juvenile delinquency compared with punitive approaches that are prevalent in some countries worldwide[5]. One example, Juvenile Aftab Bahadur executed in Lahore, a poor teenager accused of murdering a woman and her two sons [6]. The Justice Project Pakistan (JPP) handled his case and said that he is too young to face the death penalty. He spent 23 years in prison, more than a life sentence for the crime he did when he was 15 years old.

Global framework on the juvenile justice system can be defined as Article 3(1) of the Convention on the Rights of Child (CRC) states that “in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authority” the consideration should be the best interests of the child[7]. Similarly, Article 24 of the International Covenant for Child and Political Rights (ICCPR) also provides the protection of children on the part of their family, society and the State. Additionally, Article 25(3) and 35 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 provide that the state shall protect the child and empower it to make special provisions for the protection of the children and evaluate the effectiveness of the national framework.

In conclusion, the hybrid model proves effective, as minor offences are dealt with through counselling or community service, whereas serious crimes are addressed through more stringent means[8]. The dilemma between rehabilitation vs punitive in the criminal justice system has been a subject of debate throughout the world. In extreme cases, the punishment is necessary and since rehabilitation is more grounded in psychology, restorative justice and evidence-based practice, it is imperative to ensure there is proper access to mental health services.

Bibliography

1. Fatima, Ariba and Omar A Ranjha, ‘Justice in the juvenile justice system of Pakistan’ Centre for Human Rights <https://www.cfhr.com.pk/our-work/justice-in-the-juvenile-justice-system-of-pakistan accessed 23 November 2025>.
2. Huth, Paul K, ‘Deterrence and international conflict: empirical findings and theoretical debate’ (1999) Annual Review of Political Science 2, 25–48 <https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.2.1.25 accessed 23 November 2025>.
3. Joshi, Vidhi, ‘Juvenile justice systems: a comparative analysis of rehabilitation v punitive approaches in India’ (2014) ResearchGate working paper <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393427115_EVAL accessed February 2024>.
4. Kysel, Ian, ‘How not to rehabilitate young prisoners’ (2012) Al Jazeera <https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2012/10/19/how-not-to-rehabilitate-yo accessed 19 October 2012>.
5. Morelli, Mario F, ‘Incapacitation’ (2024) EBSCO Research Starters <https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/incapacitation accessed 2024>.
6. Theerathitiwong, Sitthana, ‘Retribution’ in The Encyclopedia of Corrections (Wiley, 2017) <https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118845387.wbe accessed 1 August 2017>.
7. Young, Susan, Ben Greer, and Richard Church, ‘Juvenile delinquency, welfare, justice and therapeutic interventions: a global perspective’ (2017) BMJ Open <https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC528808 accessed February 2017>.
8. Dawn, ‘“Juvenile” Aftab Bahadur Masih executed in Lahore’ (2015) <https://www.dawn.com/news/1187331 accessed 10 June 2015>.