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

police officers (see for example, Kamara 2008; European Migration Network, 2010). In the
juvenile justice system, it is common for judges to exercise full discretion in ascertaining
children‟s ages, without any clear guidelines at all There are widespread reports from
Bangladesh, Nepal and Pakistan that police officers and prosecutors often exaggerate
children‟s ages in court documents, usually to avoid having to implement the additional
safeguarding procedures granted to children by law, but also to boost arrest and prosecution
rates. Magistrates very often then accept without question the ages reported by officers and
prosecutors, and children often lack the legal representation necessary to challenge the
falsified ages (Cipriani, 1995:14). Even when specific guidance is available, there is
evidence that it is not always implemented in practice as will be discussed below.
Procedures to make official estimates of age have often proven to be impractical. For
example, medical examinations are required in many countries but the lack of detailed
knowledge and resources, and the limited availability of doctors mean that significant delays
are brought to cases. Overloaded judges do not take the time to examine evidence which is
available, such as school records or to question witnesses to ascertain children‟s true ages,
and very often they ignore the required procedures altogether. If there is still some question
over a child‟s age by the time his or her case reaches a judge‟s attention, such as in
Bangladesh, judges may simply guess the child‟s age by appearance (Cirpriani, 1995:13).
In Sierra Leone, the Children and Young Persons Act makes provisions for courts to make
inquiries to ascertain the age of a person before them. However, the Act falls short of
stating how such an inquiry should be conducted. It has become practice to seek the advice
of a medical practitioner, but given that there is only one doctor charged with the
responsibility of determining age, and a limited number of staff available to type up the
results, significant delays and adjournments to court proceedings result, and the children are
kept in detention during this time (Kamara, 2008:3). Cirpriani (2009:133) describes how this
„happens all too frequently‟, as courts in countries including Oman, Ethiopia and Sri Lanka,
request age assessments by medical professionals who are not readily available, resulting
in children being detained in locked pre-trial facilities.
The costs associated with medical assessments cannot be underestimated. Cipriani states
that wrist x-rays may cost between 60 and 85 Euros, while dental examinations can cost
approximately 90 Euros. Between the need for highly trained professionals and these
immediate costs, such examinations would not seem to be financially practicable in most
countries (2009:134), and both Bulgaria and the Czech Republic discount these methods for
this reason (European Migration Network 2010; Separated Children in Europe Programme,
2003).
The slow process of determining age impacts on all aspects of juvenile proceedings, and
undermines the very aim of the juvenile justice system to reform and rehabilitate the
juvenile, and promote their reintegration into society. However, Kamara (2008) describes
how in Sierra Leone, while the age of a juvenile remains in dispute, they will remain in
detention in an adult prison. The process has also led to prolonged trials, undermining the
principle of expeditious trials.
29