Part 4 - Juveniles/children/young persons in court cases and inquests Flashcards
What must a youth court hear/consider before deciding to lift Section 49 anonymity on the grounds of public interest?
Representations from parties/their lawyers, and consider representations from the media.
What arguments can be made about why it is particularly appropriate for the court to use its power to lift Section 49 anonymity?
The Circular issued by the Home Office and the Lord Chancellor’s Department, ‘Opening up Youth Court Proceedings’, states lifting anonymity would be particularly appropriate in respect of a juvenile defendant:
- whose offending was persistent or serious
- whose offending has had an impact on a number of people
- in circumstances when alerting people to his/her behaviour would help prevent further offending
What would be a ground for challenging the imposition or continuation of a Section 45A order, or for the relaxation of its scope?
It imposes a substantial and unreasonable restriction on the reporting of the case AND it would be in the public interest to remove or relax that restriction.
Which court confirmed that Section 39 anonymity ceases to apply when the juvenile turns 18?
Court of Appeal.
Who does automatic anonymity under Section 49 of the 1933 Act not apply to?
Juveniles who are not ‘concerned in the proceedings’.
When can a Section 39 order under the 1933 Act or a Section 45 order under the 1999 Act be challenged as invalid?
If the specified juvenile is not ‘concerned in the proceedings’.
What is a ground for challenging the imposition or continuation of a Section 45 order under the 1999 Act, or arguing for relaxation of its scope?
It imposes a substantial and unreasonable restriction on the reporting of the case AND that it would be in the public interest to remove or relax that restriction.
What could be one or more of the societal benefits of open justice in the context of a section 45 order or a section 39 order?
The ‘public interest’ factor in the context of challenging a section 45 order, or a general ground for challenging a section 39 order, could be one or more of the societal benefits of open justice.
What is a ground of challenge to the imposition or continuation of section 39 or section 45 anonymity for juveniles?
Case law and Judicial College guidance say there must be a good reason for the restriction.
What does case law say about section 39 or section 45 orders?
That they should not be used to specifically give anonymity to adults.
What case law can be cited to oppose section 39 or section 45 anonymity?
Case law states that a child victim/alleged child victim may be too young to need section 39 anonymity and this case law can be cited to oppose section 39 anonymity.
What is a ground for challenging the continuation of section 45 anonymity for a convicted defendant who is within a few months or weeks of his/her 18th birthday?
The anonymity provision will expire then and so for the reporting restriction to continue is not a matter of necessity because any further protection it gives will be too short to be of much help in his/her rehabilitation, particularly if the sentence imposed means the defendant will be in prison when he/she turns 18 and for a lengthy period thereafter, and so it can be argued that bearing in mind that the restriction is substantial, it would be unreasonable in such circumstances for it to continue to be in effect.
Why can it be argued that it would be in the public interest to remove anonymity for a convicted juvenile?
For the media to be able to identify him or her will have a deterrent effect on others who may be considering committing such crime, and the community has a particular right to know from full reporting what happened in a case of serious crime.
