Age assessment practices: a literature review & annotated ... - Unicef

age cohorts are often put through at once, and in situations of conflict or political instability,
rites of passage that would usually take place every decade or so may be put off for some
years, so that what would have been separate cohorts all go through at once, or in some
cases not at all (Conversation with Dr Nicholas Argenti, September 2010) 1 . In addition, in
response to international laws such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child,
historically wide variations in the ages at which these protections or acquisitions of rights
apply are slowly becoming more uniform and legal models based on fixed age-limits are
becoming the norm, although often through processes of conflict and debate.
Some anthropologists have expressed concerns about the possible unintended
consequences that could result from the application of a universal approach to children‟s
rights (see for example Rosen 2007), believing it could serve as a screen for the transfer of
western values and practices. However, increasingly anthropologists recognise that there is
growing global consensus concerning the individual human rights of women, children and
minorities, and many recognise the importance of ethical debates above arguments of
cultural relativism (Scheper-Hughes et al, 1998).
Implementing a universal approach to children‟s rights and as a consequence, concepts of
age has been challenging. For example, since the enactment of the Child Rights Act in
2007 in Sierra Leone, law enforcement has struggled to come to terms with the new
definition of childhood, and with the new minimum age of criminal responsibility. Practice
under the previous Children and Young Persons Act saw a child defined as any person
under the age of 14, while the age of criminal responsibility was determined under the
common law concept of doli incapax, which presumes that a child at aged 10 but not yet 14
is incapable of forming a guilty mind, which effectively put the age of criminal responsibility
at 10 years. While the Child Rights Act 2007 now takes precedence, and the minimum age
of criminal responsibility is 14, Kamara (2008:1) describes „fiery debates and arguments‟
around the issue of ascertaining the ages of children, and says that these arguments have
become the hallmark of juvenile proceedings in courts.
Religions also bring with them distinct understandings and definitions of childhood, which
have had a strong impact upon the development of legal systems. Islam, Hinduism and
Buddhism are each very influential in various South Asian legal systems, and they have
direct implications for the MACR.
There are eight major schools of thought within Islamic law, and they hold diverse
viewpoints even on questions of children‟s age and responsibility. However, in all cases
Islamic law predicates criminal responsibility upon certain individual characteristics, among
which the capacity for intelligent reason (akl) and the existence of free choice are central.
Akl is tied to the capacity for comprehension and the faculty of recognising good from evil.
In Islamic criminal law, only those who can understand a legal norm, and act according to
that understanding, are liable to be criminally responsible for violating that norm. Akl is a
capacity that develops over time. The Qur‟an does not provide explicit age guidelines
1 Dr Nicholas Argenti, Professor of Anthropology at Brunel University, London, was contacted as part of this
study in order to assist with the exploration of relevant literature on the theme of rites of passage
5