Page 59 - JUSTICE Tackling Racial Injustice - Children and the Youth Justice System

a) Ownership. The programmes with which we have been most impressed
involved criminal justice agencies taking ownership of issues and trying
to address them. We consider that where there is an actual or perceived
problem, agencies should be proactive in addressing any concerns. A
good example of ownership is the move by Hackney YOT to create a
statement on disproportionality, which it is in the process of finalising.
This will set out what Hackney YOT expects of its staff when it comes to
racial disparity.

b) Reflection. Linked to ownership, we consider that criminal justice
agencies should evaluate how current processes work, whether they are
suitable and, if necessary, be proactive in changing those processes which
are not working. For example, the CPS has improved diversity among its
staff and introduced increased scrutiny of case files focused on racial bias.
Reflection also means being curious about the children in the YJS, finding
out as much about them and their circumstances as possible and reflecting
on how these circumstances may have contributed to their behaviour and
culpability.

c) Engagement. All criminal justice agencies need to actively listen to the
communities they serve, and the children with whom they come into
contact. This means that rather than hearing accusations of bias and taking
a defensive stance, agencies should understand the causes of concern and
try to explain or address them. All too often, defensive reactions entrench
the ‘us versus them’ perception, diminishing the relationship between
criminal justice agencies and the communities they should serve. By
working with communities and children to address concerns, a justice
system that is, and is seen to be, fair can be developed.

d) Child first. When considering how to improve their processes and
procedures, criminal justice agencies should have the child at the forefront
of their mind. This may mean seeking the opinion of children affected,
designing child-friendly procedures or challenging misperceptions that
result in children being inappropriately considered more mature than they
are. The YJS must always account for the inherent vulnerability of
children, as well as their large capacity for change. The use of appropriate
terminology is key, and we support calls for all those under 18 to be
referred to as children in all future legislation and policies. This is
particularly important in this context as we have heard of numerous

52