VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
THE JUVENILE JUSTICE IN KENYA:GROWTH, SYSTEM AND STRUCTURES
Clement Okech＊

I. INTRODUCTION
Every jurisdiction in the world is grappling with the problem of juvenile delinquency. The arrangements which are employed to address the problem depend either on the pre-existing structures or havebeen variedly modified and influenced by public policy or research. Such arrangements may also lean onother social-cultural support systems that weld with the structural arrangements and acclaimed practices.
However, these arrangements have a universal appreciation that a child must not be handled as an adultoffender, much as age and social orientation of children are variedly defined by statutes and conventions.
In spite of age definition and variance across jurisdictions, the principle of the ‘Best Interest of the Child’
has had much influence in addressing juvenile justice matters since the Convention on the Right of theChild1 was promulgated universally.
Delinquency is a deviant phenomenon that may manifest any time before maturity and sometimes may
extend into adulthood. The physiological and emotional difficulties or pressures may lead a child to engage
disproportionately in anti-social conduct including crime. This can result in the child being processed
through the juvenile justice system. Extreme errant behaviours that require State intervention may beprocessed through the juvenile justice system while children in difficult circumstances may need protection and care by the State or Non-State welfare agencies or both.
This write up employs a historical and contextual approach to demonstrate the origin of present day
perspectives of juvenile justice in Kenya and the current structures and processes in place. Certain key
variables are discussed including the emergence of juvenile correction in Kenya, the socio-cultural context
of the colonial era in which justice for children is located, legislative influence and the institutions andstructures that existed and how this has evolved over time. The salient features characteristic of juvenile
justice system in Kenya including the responsible agencies, trends and the challenges being experienced
especially with emerging complex criminal behaviour of the youth are explored.

II. UNDERSTANDING THE JUVENILE SYSTEM
The juvenile justice system can be defined as the formal responsive arrangement by government toprocess and deal with a child in conflict with the law in accordance with the prescribed set of laws while
taking cognizance of the child’s rights and best interest. Juvenile justice, like in the adult process,presumes a systematic organic arrangement of government agencies that dependent upon each other yet
operating distinctly but having a shared objective of addressing delinquency or prevention of crime.
However, children who are adjudged to be in difficult circumstances or in need of care and protection may
also be processed through the same avenue and have their needs met or rights protected. Various
agencies have a role to play in the juvenile justice system including the Police, Prosecution, Probation,
Child Welfare Agency, Corrections or Prisons and the Courts. These agencies are robustly independent in
operation yet remain symbiotic organs and are expected to function in the best interest of the child.
Before examining the juvenile justice system in Kenya, it would be fitting to discuss what a ‘system’ is.
By definition, and in the context of organisation, a system is an organised purposeful structure thatconsists of interconnected and inter-reliant elements or components that interact and influence one
another yet aiming at a common goal. In the criminal justice perspective, this is conceived as the organised
Assistant Director of Probation, Probation and Aftercare Service, Kenya＊

1 UN Convention on the Right of the Child 1989.

3

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
state agencies charged with the responsibilities of maintaining law and order and exercising social control
over those who violate set laws through arrest, prosecution, trial and adjudication, and punishment or correction. In simple terms, juvenile justice is a formal way that is part of a wider approach to dealing withcriminal behaviour in children in accordance with the prescribed set of laws.
In the foregoing context, it is imperative to gauge the extent to which juvenile justice in Kenya would
be said to have fully evolved over time into a system. There are, of course, trajectory points to note whichwere greatly influenced by Kenya’s historical past.

III. THE EMERGENCE OF PENAL LEGACY IN KENYA
The imperial British introduced the English common law into her colonies as a means of promoting
common lawful behaviour among widely diverse people, (Kercher 1981)2. It is right to say that there wereveracious forms of transgression by the indigenous African before the colonial era but how they addressedsuch transgressions varied from one society to another. Although severe punishment was one way toaddress deviancy, such was not applicable to juveniles. There were also very good practices not oriented
to punishment including reconciliation, restitution, compensation by the individual or community, social
exclusion and public ridicule, religious sanctions including curse, etc. (James S. Read, 19663 cited in
Kercher 1981). On the other hand, there were also harsh penalties including corporal punishment anddeath if the offence so demanded. These were the various types of social control that exist before theadvent of colonialism.
The colonial era later introduced a dual system of justice comprising of courts that practiced purely
English common law and the African Courts which were abridged versions practicing both English andtraditional justice systems guided by English ordinances. It is worth pointing out that this arrangement
was used to process perceived juvenile delinquents. The eventual evolution into the current unitaryjustice system was greatly influenced by the indigenous clamour for independence in the 1950’s (Ibid).
The treatment of the delinquent child during the colonial times was based on the transplanted English
common law and culture with its institutional features which brought about formal structures including
the police, courts and prisons. Legal definitions and penalties were prescribed to certain acts which wereperceived as wrong by the colonial establishment. Before then, the traditional structures and setups wereorganised in a way that facilitated communal ‘ownership’ and supervision of the delinquent child. The supervision of the child was not confined to the nuclear family but was a task of every member of thecommunity. To that extent, the doctrine of parens patriae was at play. If the common role of disciplining
the errant child was a communal responsibility, then the colonial period disrupted this setup as thisfunction was taken over by regimented structures and institutions of corrections.
A. The Emergence of Penal Institutions for Young Offenders
The growth of perceived juvenile delinquency made it necessary for the colonial government to comeup with penal legislation which was strong on institutionalisation. The juvenile corrective institutions wereconceived as measures to divert children from punitive adult prisons. With increased urbanisation, many
children came to the towns either because their communities had been disrupted by colonial resettlement
programmes or by sheer town attraction. According to Kercher (19981)4, this effort was meant to⿟⿟ Reduce the likelihood of contamination of relatively inexperienced offenders by more hardcore
criminals
⿟⿟ Prevent the hardening of attitudes against society and authority resulting from embittered experience in punitive institutions
⿟⿟ Avoid labelling of the young offender as a criminal by the society and as such encouraging image
building⿟⿟ Provide special programmes for resocialisation with the goal of nipping the errand behaviour in
2 Leonard C. Kercher, The Kenyan Penal System, Past Present and Prospect, University Press of America, Inc.

3 James Read 1966, some Legal problems in East Africa, East African law Journal, (special First Anniversary Issue) Vo. 2,

no. 1.

4 Ibid.

4

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
the bud.
The juvenile correctional institutions were based on the English models modified for the African
setting. These institutions which included the Approved Schools, Borstal Institutions and Youth Corrective
Centres admitted young offenders falling below 19 years. On the other hand, there were other alternative
measures available to the courts which comprised corporal punishment, discharge, compensation or
payment of cost by the juvenile offender or parent/guardian or committal care of fit persons or society(Ibid). Probation orders were introduced through an ordinance in mid-1943 for both adults and juveniles.
1. The Establishment of Approved Schools
The first Approved School was established in Kenya in 1934 and the second in 1937 further to theEnglish Act of 1933 (Kercher 1981) although reformatory schools were in existence by 1909. Approved
schools were established by the state as special residential schools for the care and protection of children
in need including delinquents. This means that in situations, ‘normal’ children were mixed with thoseadjudged delinquent. This also points out that the State, then, perceived children in conflict with the law
as needing welfare support which was thought to be the driving force behind their migration to the towns
where they were rounded up and charged with vagrancy.
The Approved Schools which initially were under the Prisons Service were moved to the Probation
Service in 1955 after the latter had moved from Prisons. Of the five Approved Schools established then,
all were for boys and provided vocational training and formal education, (Kenya Prison’s Service Annual
Report 1960). The Schools provided both vocational training and formal academic education. The Children
and Young Persons Act Cap 141 of 1969 brought out a distinct categorisation of which schools admitted
children of what age. However, it prescribed that children had to be detained in these facilities until theyattained 18 years of age.
2. From Approved Schools to Rehabilitation Schools
The Children’s Act 0f 2001 made a significant policy change on these reformatory schools starting withrenaming them as Rehabilitation Schools. The reinvented schools provide accommodation, protection andare for young children. The schools are empowered to receive, maintain, train and rehabilitate children in
conflict with the law as well as those requiring care and protection. At present, there are 9 rehabilitations
schools
Table 1. Juvenile Population Categorisation for Three Financial Years
Rehabilitation
School2013/20142014/2015

2015/2016

P/C*

CR**

TOTAL

P/C

CR

TOTAL

P/C

CR

TOTAL

OTHAYA

153

21

174

84

19

135

84

19

103

LIKONI

162

2

164

95

4

99

95

4

99

KERICHO

119

21

140

88

4

92

88

4

92

KABETE

113

58

171

48

12

60

48

12

60

WAMUMU

10

167

177

10

109

119

10

109

119

DAGORETTI

172

5

177

89

3

92

108

3

111

KIRIGITI

140

18

158

162

7

169

162

7

169

KISUMU

30

-

30

50

10

60

50

50

60

KAKAMEGA

151

22

173

90

2

92

90

2

92

TOTALS

937

314

1251

716

170

886

735

210

945

*Protection and Care, **Criminal Cases

5

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
B. Establishment of Juvenile Remand Homes
The juvenile remand homes were set up just at the same time as the other reformatory schools. By
1960 there were 6 remand homes all near the major towns. The homes were built as places for temporary
reception, safe custody and for keeping vagrant children. Any government official could bring in children
including chiefs, police and locals with reasons for admission, mostly being vagrants, without a court order.
Presently, there are 14 Children Remand Homes in Kenya accommodating both children in conflictwith the law and those in need of care and protection. Committing to and release from these facilities canonly be through the court. The remand homes are run by the Department of Children Services which is
responsible for the child welfare.
C. Establishment of Borstal Institutions
The Borstal Institution was crafted as a penal facility for juvenile offenders found guilty of offences
thought to be of serious nature. Borstal institutions were first established in England in 1908 to cater forthe 16 to 21-year-old juvenile adult category who by virtue of their criminal habits or association with suchcharacters, were deemed to merit institutionalisation for purposes of reformation and repression of crime
Garland (1995) cited in Newburn (2002). The first such facility was constructed in Kenya in 1963 to admit
boys aged between 15 and 17 years after criminal adjudication by the courts. Unlike the Approved School
which admitted boys until they attained the age of adulthood or unless there were alternative measuresthat could ensure care and control of the child, admission to a Borstal Institution was, and still is, up to
three years. The boys admitted to Borstal Institutions had a limited chance of being released before twoyears were over and also had to be placed under the supervision of a probation officer for one year upon
release, (Kenya Prison Service Annual Report 1960).
1. Borstal Institutions at Present
At present, the Borstal Schools are run by the Kenya Prison Service. There are three such facilities
with the third having been opened in 2016 for girls. The facilities offer vocational training academic
education and agricultural instruction. The staff at the school comprise both uniformed and civilian officers.
No member of staff is allowed to be armed while in the facility.
Whereas the Borstal infrastructure remains relatively the same, the training and inclusion of other ‘soft’programmes have been introduced. The element of assessment to precede classification has been introduced although the infrastructure may not allow for physical risk classification as would have been desired
subsequent to the assessment. There has been an introduction of individualised case management unlike
before where no specific personal engagement was evident. Some of the prison officers who run the institution have university training in social sciences and have acquired skills in counselling.
There is a comprehensive aftercare programme run by both the Kenya Prison Service and theProbation and Aftercare Service. Post-penal supervision is accorded to each offender by probation officers
for a period determined by the Board of Licence that releases the youthful offenders mostly after they
have spent a certain period in the institutions. The release licence authorises the probation officer tosupervise the offenders for the purposes of reintegration and resettlement. Such release cannot be
accorded an inmate unless a pre-release environment adjustment report has been filed by the Probation
Service. As of July 2016 there were 339 inmates at Shilo La Tewa Borstal Institution and 384 inmates at
Shikusa Borstal Institution.

6

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
Table 2. Borstal Institutions and Offence TypePENAL CODE
CATEGORY

OFFENCE

2013

%

2014

%

2015

%

I

Offences against Order &administration of lawfulauthority

28

5.1%

24

5.0%

22

6.75%

74

5.46%

III

Offences injurious to the
public in general

34

6.2%

33

6.85%

53

16.26%

120

8.85%

III

Offences against the person

88

16.1%

70

14.5%

27

8.28%

185

13.64%IV

Offences relating toproperty

382

69.7%

321

66.6%

212

65.03%

915

67.48%V

Forgery, conning, counterfeiting

1

0.18%

1

0.21%

2

0.61%

4

0.29%

VI

Attempts and conspiracy tocommit crimes

1

0.18%

1

0.21%

1

0.31%

3

0.22%

VII

Offences under narcotic
Acts

14

2.55%

30

6.22%

6

1.84%

50

3.69%

VIII

Others

0

0

2

0.41%

3

0.92%

5

0.37%

548

482

326

%

1356

Source: Kenya Prison Service, 2016

The two Borstal Institutions for boys in Kenya have a holding capacity of 600 inmates but are
currently overpopulated by 123 inmates. The programmes which are run in the institutions include:⿟⿟ Formal Education
⿟⿟ Vocational training (Mainly Carpentry & Tailoring)⿟⿟ Agriculture⿟⿟ Counselling⿟⿟ Life skills training
Although accredited treatment programmes that are in vogue and meant to treat specific offence
types are yet to be introduced, the authorities at the facility have embarked on a capacity-building project
to introduce sex-offence and drug-and-substance-abuse treatment programmes. Already the concept of assessment of risk and needs to inform classification and treatment is well grounded.
The new Borstal Institution for girls has operated for less than three months and has had admission of
6 inmates.
D. Youth Corrective Training Centre
The Youth Corrective Training Centre was established in 1962 to cater for boys who were deemed to
be unruly and needing ‘short-sharp-shock’ treatment. It was thought to fit those who were considered to
be defiant to authority and could not be supervised under probation and yet did not warrant long-term
confinement like the Borstal Institution. The Centre was meant for the rough undisciplined youth whoneeded to be detached from the family and kept in such a facility as a deterrent and corrective measure.
The Youth Corrective Training Centre (YCTC) is established under the Prisons Act. There is only one
YCTC at Kamiti for boys and none for girls. Children and youth admitted to the centre must be aged
between 17-21 years for a duration of four months. This institution provides an environment that facilitates short-term institutional supervision.

7

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
The institution is meant for first time offenders who may require close regimented supervision andtheir admission to the institutions is through the court and the advice of a probation officer. Due to therelative short time that the boys stay in this facility, there is no vocational training other than somefarming, rigorous outdoor chores and hobbies.
One of the challenges with this arrangement is that there is no follow up or aftercare for purposes ofreintegration upon discharge. Its efficacy has also been questioned in the wake of similar arrangements
assisting in the Borstal Institution capturing almost the same age bracket.

IV. THE JUVENILE JUSTICE PROCESSThe delivery of Juvenile Justice in Kenya is anchored on existing relevant legislation among them
being the Criminal Procedure Code, the Penal Code and other statutes which specifically touch on
children. This legislation is implemented by various agencies including the Police, Courts, Probation, Department of Children’s Services, Prisons and the Office of the Public Prosecution. While juvenile justice has
undergone tremendous changes since the enactment of the current Children’s Act in 2001, there is still
demand for greater efficacy in the way of improving services by the magistrates, probation officers,
children officers, prison officers and police officers, all who influence the plight of children in the justiceprocess.
Children are often arrested for committing offences and processed in similar ways as adult offenders.
This is with regard to the application of the Evidence Act or the Criminal Procedure Code which are themain laws applicable in criminal trials. The Police or any authorised officer may apprehend a child for due
processing. The police conduct the investigation and decide whether there is sufficient evidence to charge
the juvenile if thought culpable. The law expects the police to have a separate holding facility for children
in their custody. Despite limited rooms at the many police stations, the police must make arrangements tohave children, boys and girls separated from each other and from adults. The police only have 23 childprotection units which are child friendly.
Since 2013, the prosecution services, whether for adult or juvenile cases, was transferred from thepolice to the Office of the Director of Public Persecution. This means that all children are prosecuted bystate lawyers working under the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution (ODPP).
Table 3: Children Arrested in Years 2013, 2014 and 2015
COUNTYNUMBER OF CHILDREN ARRESTED
2013

2014

2015

TOTAL

1

EASTERN REGION

301

288

309

898

2

CENTRAL REGION

183

269

250

702

3

WESTERN REGION

117

182

209

508

4

NAIROBI REGION

139

70

62

271

5

RIFT VALLEY REGION

334

346

427

1107

6

COAST REGION

170

221

167

558

7

NYANZA REGION

324

350

334

1008

8

NORTH EASTERN

22

26

47

95

TOTAL

1,590

1,752

1,805

5,147

Source: National Police Service 2016

A. Juvenile Justice Model
The Kenyan Juvenile System does not strictly adhere to a distinct Juvenile Justice model. While the8164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
Kenya Criminal Justice System is adversarial, the juvenile justice system is not strictly adversarial. It
appears to be a mix of the models that embrace both the justice and welfare models. It is a combination of
the welfare approach and the justice model and driven by the principle of the best interests of the childmuch as the trial process is accusatorial. This is evident in the various provisions in the Children Act No.
8 of 2001 which spells out specific procedures for handling children who come into contact with the law.
For example, the procedures in court and all the other agencies in the criminal justice system are to be
conducted in an informal manner and the court sitting arrangement is one that is child friendly, and safeguards on the welfare of the child are taken into consideration at every stage of the proceedings. International standards necessary to ensure the best interests of the child are emphasised.
Children Courts are manned by magistrates all who are professional lawyers. Every magistratepresiding over a children’s court must be gazetted by the Chief Justice.
According to the Children Act 2001, the Children’s Court shall sit in a different building or room, or atdifferent times, from those in which sittings of courts other than Children’s Courts are held, and no person
shall be present at any sitting of a Children’s Court except –(a) Members and officers of the court;(b) Parties to the case before the court, their advocates and witnesses and other persons directly
concerned in the case;(c) Parents or guardians of any child brought before the court;(d) bona fide registered representatives of newspapers or news agencies;(e) Such other persons as the court may specially authorise to be present.
The probation officer’s role in juvenile matters is crucial. Whereas children officers mostly handle casesof child protection including custody and care in remand and rehabilitation schools, probation officers’ roleis in assisting the court with regard to decision making in cases of child offenders and their supervisionand rehabilitation in the community. These decisions relate to bail decisions and procedures related to disposition subsequent to trial and judgment. It is the role of a probation officer to help the court determine
the most appropriate disposal method including deciding on institutional confinement, committal to correctional institutions or supervision in the community. No child can be ordered to imprisonment, death orsent to a rehabilitation school if he or she is below ten years or subjected to corporal punishment.
A children’s court can make the following orders in relation to a child offender:⿟⿟ discharging the offender under section 35 (1) of the Penal Code;⿟⿟ discharging the offender on his entering into a recognisance, with or without sureties;
⿟⿟ making a probation order against the offender under the provisions of the Probation of OffendersAct;⿟⿟ committing the offender to the care of a fit person, whether a relative or not, or a charitablechildren’s institution willing to undertake his care;⿟⿟ if the offender is above ten years and under fifteen years of age, by ordering him to be sent to arehabilitation school suitable to his needs and attainments
⿟⿟ ordering the offender to pay a fine, compensation or costs, or any or all of them
⿟⿟ in the case of a child who has attained the age of sixteen years, dealing with him in accordancewith any Act which provides for the establishment and regulation of Borstal institutions
⿟⿟ placing the offender under the care of a qualified counselor⿟⿟ ordering him to be placed in an educational institution or a vocational training programme⿟⿟ ordering him to be placed in a probation hostel under provisions of the Probation of Offenders
Act making a community service order
Whereas the Probation and Aftercare Service is mandated to handle cases of children in conflict withthe law through advisory reports to court and other penal release organs, the Children’s Department superintends all matters pertaining to child protection policy

9

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101

Police Investigation
The Community

Investigation and release
Apprehension/Arrest/ detention
Detention &formal charge

Prosecution and Court
Trial
Reports

Bail or Remand

Supervision & Corrections
Custody-Borstal Inst, Rehabilitation Schools, YCTC,
Probation Hostel
Community Service
Fines/Discharge

Post-releasesupervision /Aftercareandsupportin thecommunity

Community, Police, Prosecution, Judiciary, Probation, Prisons, Deptof Children

V. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO CHILDREN
For the first time in Kenya, the Bill of Rights in the Constitution (2010) incorporates child rights andchild justice issues as a special category. Article 21 (3) obligates State organs and all public officers toaddress the needs of vulnerable groups in society including children and this is buttressed further in 21(4).
The Constitution provides for certain rights that cannot be derogated. These include the right tofreedom from torture and cruel, inhumane or degrading punishment or treatment; freedom from slavery
or servitude, the right to a fair trial and the right to an order of habeas corpus. These are rights that arecore to the juvenile justice system.
Access to justice is guaranteed under Article 48 and further Article 49, 50 and 51 are most instructive
in relation to the criminal justice process as they make provisions for due process rights. The provisions
seek to ensure expeditious, dignified and fair process of justice. Some of the core rights worth mentioning
include:⿟⿟ the right to be informed promptly of reasons for arrest;
⿟⿟ the right to remain silent;⿟⿟ the right to counsel of one’s choice;⿟⿟ the right against self-incrimination;
⿟⿟ the right to expeditious trial and particularly that a person arrested shall be arraigned in court
within 24 hours of arrest;
⿟⿟ the right to be released on bail unless there are compelling reasons against the same and that
persons charged with offences punishable by fine only on imprisonment for up to 6 months mustnot be remanded in custody
Article 50 guarantees the right to a fair hearing. It protects the right of the presumption of innocence
until proven guilty; the right to adequate defence; the right to a public and fair trial; the right to counsel of
one’s choice and to have an advocate assigned to the accused person by the State and at the State
expense, if substantial injustice would otherwise result, and to be informed of this right promptly.
Of significance are Articles 50(7), (8) and (9), which provide for intermediaries for the complainant or
the accused to communicate with the court and for the exclusion of the press or other members of the
public where the exclusion is necessary, in a free and democratic society, to protect witnesses or vulnerable persons, morality, public order or national security. This last provision is very important to childoffenders, child victims and witnesses of crime. It provides the framework for a more comprehensive legislation that will give better protection for children in the justice system and that acknowledges thatchildren may require special assistance to enable them to testify. This provision is already provided forunder the Sexual Offences Act and also under the Children’s Act.

10

164TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE
VISITING EXPERTS’ PAPERS
A. Constitutional Rights Relating to Children in the Justice System
Other than the rights stipulated in the Constitution as indicated above, the Constitution in Article 52
provides for special protection for children. It provides, under Article 53 (1), the right to free and compulsory basic education, basic nutrition, shelter and health care, to be protected from abuse, neglect, all formof violence, inhumane treatment or punishment, and hazardous or exploitative labour, not to be detained,
except as a measure of last resort and when detained, to be held; (i) for the shortest appropriate period oftime and, (ii) separate from adults in conditions that take account of the child’s sex and age. Article 53 (2),states that a child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child. The
principle of participation is also entrenched in the Constitution. Thus, the Constitution, over and above thegeneral provisions make very progressive provisions in relation to children in the justice system thattakes into account the special circumstances of children. It will be observed that when these rights are
not realised or given to the child, there are chances that the children could engage in criminality.
B. Legislation on Children and Juvenile Justice
The enactment of the Children’s Act 2001 had similar circumstances as what Sims and Preston (2006)5
outline on the establishment of the juvenile court in America in the early years. Other than the need todomesticate International Conventions on the Right of the Child6 that Kenya had ratified in 1990, it was asmuch a product of the child saving movement as it was a matter of response to urban and social happenings of that time. These factors included increased attraction of children to urban centres, gross neglect ofchildren resulting in many fending for themselves and in the process getting into contact with the law anddissatisfaction with rights protection and treatment measures in the juvenile correctional facilities.
The Children Act 2001 is the embodiment of child rights, protection and welfare legislation. The
powers granted to various bodies entrusted with securing these rights and for provision of welfare
services and correctional services are enshrined therein. Part XIII of the Act specifically deals with processing of children in the children court and the roles of both the probation officer with regard to provisionof social inquiry reports. Although the regulations under the Act stipulate that children charged with misdemeanours should be tried within a period of three months and those charged with felonies should betriad within 6 months, this is not adhered to.

VI. COORDINATION OF THE JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
As noted, responsibility to dispense justice is dispersed among various institutions working interdependently to deliver the constitutional promise. The traditional components of Kenya’s justice system havebeen the Law Enforcement, (Police), Prosecution (the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions), theCourts (The Judiciary) and Corrections (the Prison and Probation Services). Traditionally, these pillars of
the Justice Sector have developed and pursued their own mandates, priorities, goals and strategies, usuallyworking in competition against each other for resources and public space, and with scant regard for coordination and partnership in spite of having a shared goal of justice delivery and crime reduction.
In order to address this challenge, the government established the National Council on the Administration of Justice (NCAJ) through an amendment of the Judicial Service Act 2011. The NCAJ is established
as a high-level unincorporated body concerned with policy formulation, policy review and policy implementation throughout the justice chain. Its functions are to to ensure a co-ordinated, efficient, effective andconsultative approach in the administration of justice and reform of the justice system. Specifically, its
functions are geared towards:(a) Formulating policies relating to the administration of justice;(b) Implementing, monitoring, evaluating and reviewing strategies for the administration of justice;(c) Facilitating the establishment of court user committees at the county level;(d) Mobilising resources for purposes of the efficient administration of justice.
(e) Liaising with the Council of the National Crime Research Centre in carrying out its mandate;(f) Reviewing and implementing the reports of the Court users’ committees; and(g) Overseeing the operations of any other body engaged in administration of justice.
5 Sims, Barbara. And Preston, Pamela, Handbook of Juvenile Justice, Practice and Theory, Tailor and Francis Group.
6 UN General Assembly Resolution 44/25 of 20. November 1989.

11

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 101
The NCAJ has representation from 14 key agencies in the justice sector. The coordination of juvenile
justice falls under the purview of this organ which is replicated at every court station through a Court
Users Committees chaired by respective heads of the judiciary at both the High Court and the lower
courts.
The other organs meant for the coordinating juvenile justice services include the National Council ofChildren’s Services established under the Children’s Act, the Probation Case Committee established under
the Probation of Offenders Act, the Community Service Orders Committee and the Area Children
Advisory committees at the local levels

VII. CONCLUSION
The genesis of treatment of errant juveniles has been in Kenya for over nine decades and was influenced by both the country’s historical past as well as pragmatic policies brought about at independence
and later at the turn of the century and more recently with the making of a new constitution in 2010
which has encapsulated issues of rights and welfare of children. The handling of child offenders in the
Kenyan Justice System is still largely adversarial in spite of the provision related to access to justice especially with regard to right to legal counsel. There is need for more welfare-oriented approaches to beinfused with due process models which focus more on what the law demands as opposed to what may bein the best interest of the child. This has been compounded by the system change where all prosecutions
are now being handled by lawyers/state counsels whereas legal representation for children is largely
weak in spite of it being a legal requirement.
The volume of children entering the justice system is rising and this may be a pointer to increasing
general population or challenges related to juvenile justice polices which are weak on diversion and otheralternatives to the due process of law. Although the country has retained the English models of reformatory schools, there is need to hasten the introduction of evidence-based treatment methods that encompass
assessment to inform classification and intervention based on identified problem areas by skilled personnel,
the present good work notwithstanding. There is plenty of room for a majority of the cases currently
being committed to correctional institutions to be supervised in the community while on probation orders
or community service orders unless adjudged as high risk. There is receptiveness towards juveniles whichis good social capital that should be invested in.

12