LAHORE: A downward trend has been witnessed in the number of juvenile prisoners in 2010 compared to previous year, says a report.

The total new admissions to prisons or under-trial prisoners in 2010 were 1,061 while some 1,951 children were reported to have entered the prisons during the previous year, AGHS director Hina Jilani said while briefing reporters about the annual report on Children in Punjab Prisons, 2010, at the Lahore Press Club on Tuesday.

Compiled by the AGHS’ Child Rights Unit (CRU) on the basis of information received from 28 prisons of Punjab, the report, she said, portrayed an accurate picture of the trends regarding treatment of children in the criminal justice process and the extent to which juvenile justice standards were observed.

The report says according to the official data, only two female children were in prison in 2010, of which one was released in May while the other was admitted in June and continued to be in the prison by the end of 2010.

“This cannot be presumed to be a correct estimate of the total number of female prisoners in Punjab in the whole year as CRU did not regularly receive data from Multan Women Jail and Faisalabad District Jail which detain female juveniles,” she said.

Among the children found in prisons in 2010, it was observed that one per cent were in the age bracket of 12-15 years and the largest number was found in 16-18 years age group, forming almost 65 per cent of the total juvenile inmates. Most of the new entrants were also aged between 16-18 years as was the case in 2009. The youngest juvenile was an eight-year-old boy at Sahiwal Central Jail on the charges of murder.

As was the case in the previous years, a downward trend has been seen in the age bracket of 7-11 years. It rose slightly in 2009. However, it again declined in 2010 forming 0.8 per cent of the children entering the prisons in 2010. A six per cent decline was also observed in the children entering prisons in 2010 in the age brackets of 12-15 and 16-18 years.

Some 34 per cent of the total average population of juveniles was charged with offences against the human body (murder, attempt to murder, assault etc); 25 per cent for property related offences (theft, robbery etc); 18 per cent for sexual offences; 11 per cent for possession of weapons and the remaining were charged for possession of drugs and other miscellaneous offences.

Most of the new entrants in 2010 were charged with property related offences. “There has been substantial decline in the number of children charged with drug related offences which is an important development that has been observed in the past few years,” said Ms Jilani.

Pre-sentence detention period for 76 per cent children has been from one to four months; for 18 per cent it was from five to eight months while five per cent children remained in nine-month or more detention before conviction.

It says 12 children were undergoing the longest pre-sentence detention. They had already spent 12 months and continued to be in pre-sentence detention by the end of the year, she said.

Of the 63 children interviewed, some 60 claimed they had not been produced before the court within 24 hours of arrest and alleged to have suffered torture or custodial violence in varying degrees.

A total of 84 convicted juveniles were found in Bahawalpur and Faisalabad borstals in December last year. On an average, 64 convicted children were in Punjab Borstals, 46 in Faisalabad and 18 in Bahawalpur. Four new convicts were admitted to Faisalabad borstal each month on an average while a total of six juveniles were admitted to Bahawalpur borstal in 2010.

Ms Jilani said the record of reporting details of juveniles improved substantially in 2010.

“Cooperation of the prison department in this regard is greatly appreciated but one remaining concern, however, is reporting with regard to female children both under trial and convicted.

“Observance of rules of segregation has improved but the practice of housing persons above the age of 18 in juvenile wards is still there. It must be completely eliminated. The policy of segregation among children should also be clarified and properly enforced. A certain level of ambiguity prevails under the applicable Prisons Rules. In addition to age-wise segregation, efforts should

be made to segregate convicted and under-trial children,” she said.

In the past, the CRU had observed that both under-trial and convicted children were doing labour in some jails. The CRU teams have not observed such trends in the prisons surveyed during 2010.

“It seems that a correction of policy might have occurred. Nevertheless, it is also possible that these activities continue but in a less visible manner. With regard to certain activities carried out in the name of vocational training that still continues, the question of monetary benefit from children’s labour should be considered in order to assess whether such activity amounts to extraction of labour prohibited under the law.

“A distinction will have to be made in the programmes for under-trial and convicted children. Convicted children need initiatives with reformative and restorative content. The programmes for under-trial children must primarily be aimed at their physical and mental development and personality building.

“Indoor and outdoor rest and leisure activities are generally inadequate and not available on a regular basis. No specific arrangements for the child population exist in any of the district jails. In particular, jails lack proper arrangements for the care or rehabilitation of drug addicts. A sufficient number of children admitted to the prisons require such care. There was no provision for psychological care in any of the facilities visited by the CRU team,” said Ms Jilani.

There has been no change in conditions under which family visits for juveniles take place. The alleged malpractices include corruption and mismanagement by the jail staff.

“These complaints have been both long standing and widespread enough to be of serious concern and merit proper investigation by the prison authorities.

The report suggests that staff for borstals, other correctional facilities and juvenile wards should be recruited separately and they should not be transferred to other adult prisons. Prison staff posted at such facilities must be specially trained to deal with children and be fully aware of the legal provisions and standards relevant to the custody, care and treatment of children in prison. In particular, they should be sensitised to the kind of language to be used that is in consonance with children’s right to dignity.

“There is no authority within the prison system exclusively responsible for looking after the interest of children and for advising or counselling them on their cases or arranging legal assistance for them.

“Social Learning Programme in selected prisons of Punjab has been an important development in the education system with the support and cooperation extended by the Inspector-General of Prisons.

“The use of isolation of children as punishment, especially if they are drug abusers or have violated prison discipline is inappropriate and must be strictly prohibited, if any jail is found to have adopted such a practice. The system of probation has not been developed enough to play its required role for juveniles. The Probation and Reclamation Department should be upgraded and a special branch should be created to deal with cases of children. Sufficient number of probation officers should be recruited and trained to assist the police and courts in implementing the provisions of Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000.

“Section 10 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000 does not allow children under the age of 15 to be kept in police custody. However, almost all children in that age range interviewed during the course of prison visits were kept in police custody for varying periods of time. In many cases children were kept even beyond the time legally allowed under the law. A very high percentage of the children interviewed disclosed torture, abuse and bad treatment by the police. This unacceptable situation has been pointed out to the authorities but still continues without any effective measures being adopted by theconcerned authorities or the courts.

Police officers must be instructed strictly to involve probation officers from the time of the arrest of a child and to comply with the requirements of the law now in force.

“The courts have generally not assigned lawyers for children that require free legal aid at the pre-trial stage. This resulted in many children not being able to apply for bail or challenge any illegality committed against them with respect to their detention or the case in general before the trial begins. Among the children who were assigned lawyers by court for the trial of their cases, many had never even met them (lawyers). Some had merely seen their lawyers in court but were never consulted by the lawyer regarding their case, nor given any explanation or information on its progress. Most of the children also stated that they had never spoken to the judge.

“Children are deprived of an important opportunity of complaining in case of any custodial abuse and neglect or of difficulties that the system presented for them. Courts are sentencing children to rigorous imprisonment even though the law specifically bars children being ordered to labour under section 12 (a) of Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000. Such sentences must be brought to the attention of the superior courts for correction,” maintained Ms Jilani.