JUVENILE CRIME AND TREATMENT OF SERIOUS AND VIOLENTJUVENILE DELINQUENTS IN THAILAND
Korakod Narkvichetr*

I. OVERVIEW OF JUVENILE DELIQUENCY
Owing to its history and position, Thailand is a leading partner in Southeast Asian trade and politics.
As a result of socio-economic development, political change and globalization in recent last decades, Thai
society has been transformed from a completely agricultural country to a semi-industrial country. While
globalization has provided some groups in society with new opportunities for social mobility, it has also
created new sources of inequality and insecurity for others. Moreover, urbanization and industrialization
have created complicated communities that have a variety of competing cultures, thus breaking down
previous tradition and more cohesive patterns of values. Subsequently, crime rates, including deviance andcrime among children and youth, have increased.
According to the Department of Juvenile Observation and Protection’s statistics, the number of juvenile
delinquents (7 to 18 years old) who were arrested by the police and sent to the Juvenile Observation andProtection Centers across the country increased from 29,915 in 2003 to 51,128 in 2007, an increase of 70.91% in the space of 10 years. (Table 1)
Table 1: The Number of Juveniles in 2003-2007, Classified by Gender

Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007

Male
27,17430,36832,75644,161
46,593

Number of Children and Youths
Female
2,741
2,940
3,324
4,057
4,535

Source: The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department, Ministry of Justice, 2008.

Total
29,91533,30836,08048,21851,128

However, the number of juvenile offenders in 2007 (51,128) is only 0.45% of the total national juvenile
population of 11,233,070 in 2008 (Department of Provincial Administration, 2008).
In Table 2, the number of juveniles, whose age range is from 7 to 18 years, has increased substantially.
The age distribution of juveniles is shown in Table 2. More specific demographics of juveniles in 2003 to2007 are shown in Tables 2 to 5.
Table 2: The Number of Juveniles in 2003- 2007, Classified by Age

Age
7-14 years old
15-18 years old
Total

2003
4,313
25,602
29,915

Number of Children and Youths/Year
2004
2005
2006
5,177
5,872
8,078
28,13130,20840,14033,30836,08048,218Source: The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department, Ministry of Justice, 2008.

* Director of the Probation Office, Region 3, Department of Probation, Ministry of Justice, Thailand.

128

2007
8,888
42,24051,128

139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPERTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

Table 3: The Number of Juveniles in 2003-2007, Classified by Level of Education

Education
Non-education-Below G1Grades 1-6
Grades 7-9
Grades 10-12 or higher
Others
Total

2003
498
10,305
12,433
5,420
1,259
29,915

Number of Children and Youths/Year
2004
2005
2006
2007
586
1,024
2,333
2,235
11,001
11,951
14,522
15,35013,836
15,05019,197
20,434
5,885
6,381
9,521
10,019
2,000
1,674
2,645
3,090
33,30836,08048,21851,128Source: The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department, Ministry of Justice, 2008.

Table 4: The Number of Juveniles in 2003-2007, Classified by Residence

Residence
Together with Parents
Separated familyHomeless
Single parent
Stays with others
Stays alone
Total

2003
14,495
15,420
495
8,374
5,810
741
29,915

Number of Children and Youths/Year
2004
2005
2006
2007
16,196
17,981
24,175
24,95017,112
18,09924,043
26,178
481
308
142
128
9,296
9,688
12,36913,192
6,476
7,233
10,724
11,995
859
870
808
836
33,30836,08048,21851,128Source: The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department, Ministry of Justice, 2008.

Table 5: The Number of Juveniles in 2003-2007, Classified by Causes of Offence

Causes of Offence
Mental disorder
Quarrel and fightEconomic status
Induced / forced
Family condition
Peer group
Unawareness
Impetuousness
Indictment on charge
Total

2003
2,400
3,220
15,3104,484
4,501
29,915

Number of Children and Youths/Year
2004
2005
2006
2007
135
79
2,515
2,432
2,381
2,510
3,375
3,505
1,849
1,870
2,760
3,129
3,867
3,060
17,213
19,035
19,374
20,215
4,735
4,853
5,722
5,539
5,566
7,839
6,219
6,553
5,815
6,589
33,30836,08048,21851,128Source: The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department, Ministry of Justice, 2008.

The tables show that most of the juvenile offenders are 15 to 18 years old. Most of them have an
education that ended between the seventh and ninth grades. A large number of them are from separated
families and lived with their single parents. Most juveniles reported that they committed the offence
because of peer group influence. The interrelationship of these factors is, on the surface, self-evident.
Economic pressures create problematic situations in the family and these situations impact family relations,which can result in pushing juveniles under the influence of their peer groups. Peer groups then create
their own subculture, which can have positive or negative influences on the juveniles. Unfortunately,
most of the peer groups’ influence is assumed negative. In addition, the juveniles might be tempted by thechanging materialistic values concomitant with economic development. While this is speculation basedon many Western criminological assertions, from a practical perspective policies are approached on theseassumptions. However, the approach of the juvenile system in Thailand assumes that no single factor alone
can be identified as responsible for the causation of juvenile delinquency and that the above factors areconditions to be considered.

129

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.78

There are research findings which affirm that most juveniles, who were found guilty by the Central
Juvenile and Family Court and were sentenced to attend a programme at a training school for boys, finishedelementary school, were involved with drugs, and came from broken families (Prinya, 2001). Another otherstudy found that the juvenile’s marital status, level of education, job, deviant behaviour, neighbourhood,family income, and debt and criminal record of family members do not have any relationship with the crime
they committed but associated friends and associated victims do have a relationship with the incident(Puttidej, 1999).
Table 6: The Number of Juveniles in 2003-2007, Classified by the Offences

Offences
Against property
Homicide & bodily injury
Sexual offence
Public peace & security
Drug abuse
Weapons & explosives
Other offences
Total

2003
8,886
4,843
1,735
1,016
5,897
1,957
5,581
29,915

Number of Children and Youths/Year
2004
2005
2006
2007
10,496
10,733
14,314
14,764
5,969
6,112
8,284
7,784
2,416
2,680
3,652
2,154
1,149
1,271
1,731
3,247
5,310
6,542
8,803
10,279
2,031
2,404
3,414
3,650
5,937
6,338
8,020
9,250
33,30836,08048,21851,128Source: The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department, Ministry of Justice, 2008.

From Table 6, the largest group of juvenile delinquents was committed to the centres for property
offences. Significantly, the number of juveniles who committed homicide and bodily injury offences increased
from 4,843 cases in 2003 to 8,284 cases in 2006 and dropped slightly in 2007. In the last two decades, heroin
was the major drug problem among both adults and juveniles, but since 1996 methamphetamines haveplayed a significant role, followed by various kinds of volatile substances such as glue, thinner, lacquer, etc.
The findings of Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Education research interviews with drug users
aged between 17 and 23 stated that the most common characteristics of drug abusers were that they comefrom broken families and suffer from low self-esteem. Youths took methamphetamines so they could feel
more relaxed and relieved of their troubles. They sought instant gratification, to escape from hard workand academic difficulties. Most abusers resort to stealing and end up trading in methamphetamines due tothe easy profits to be made (Rojanaphruk, 2001). Similarly, research organized by the Foundation for Child
Development found that some school students used drugs and had to find money to afford the drugs theyused. Moreover, children were also introduced to the business by adults who saw a loophole in the law
because of the light punishment for children who commit such offences (Tulyawasinpong, 2002).
Besides drug abuse offences, offences against property as well as bodily injury and homicide cases areserious problems, especially in the big cities. The Metropolitan Police Bureau 9 declared that in the first
five months of 2003 five hundred children were arrested for crimes ranging from robbery, pick-pocketingand bag-snatching to extortion. The number of youth gang offenders held in police stations had more thandoubled during the two-month school holidays. Most of them were aged from 9 to 15. They robbed victims
and used the money to buy drugs, play video games and go out. Youths were committing more serious
crimes and at younger ages. The victims are also young and sometimes young offenders get to know their
victims through the Internet (Hanpanyapichit and Somsin, 2003).
The other concern for teenagers is the battleground between rival student gangs. The main culprits in thestreet fights are vocational students, who are typically aged 16 to 18. Formerly, students used their school
equipment, such as T-squares, iron rulers, cutters, and their belts as weapons, and the fighting rarely caused
death. Nowadays teen gangs, including students, use guns to shoot students from the rival institutes without
knowing those students personally. In addition, the events always occur in public places such as on buses,
in shopping malls, etc. Thus, students who joined gangs, normal students, and bystanders are easily injured
or killed in violence between teenagers. Students attest to the level of violence that has been used in nearly
2,000 attacks recorded by police in the capital during 10 months in 2004. Recently, fighting that culminatedin running battles involving nearly 100 students left nine injured, and the education ministry ordered two

130139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPERTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

schools shut for a chance to bring their students into line or face permanent closure. In addition, a total of 12
schools have been placed on a government watch list because of violent behaviour (Chaisatien, 2003).
Many reasons and theories are suggested to explain juvenile offences. Some officials in charge of juvenile
cases say that fighting gives some students their only role in life. The students who lead the battle wantsociety to accept them, so they do something to draw people’s attention and fighting is the best way to get
attention rather than winning scholarships, which benefits only a few people. The police claim that problems
have been compounded by the failure of schools to try to solve the problem by denying their involvement
and often stating that troublemakers had already been expelled or left. Moreover, psychologists indicatedthat contributing factors to teen deviance also include the media, peer pressure, and biological disorders(Chaisatien, 2003). Additionally, young people are becoming increasingly violent and blaming society andtheir own families for their behaviour. In a student forum, students stated that they resorted to violence asa means to solve every problem. They brawl because they cannot win against one another and they are all
feeling the pressure of strict school rules and the decrees of their parents and society, so they are releasing
their stress through violence. Some accepted that they absorbed violent behaviour from violent computer
games. However, most students agreed that resorting to corporal punishment will not solve the problem(Na Mahachai, 2003). Nevertheless, from a larger societal perspective, juvenile delinquents are a reflectionof the failure of the family unit, curriculum and school administration, and poor criminal justice procedureand rehabilitation. The Thai Farmer Research Center’s survey on children in the capital found that children
in Bangkok were living under pressure due to family, love, and financial problems. Sixty percent of the920 children interviewed said they had family problems, while 69% said their schools and colleges were
not drug-free. In addition, most juvenile delinquents came from broken families, families which failed toinculcate morals in their children, or families where parents often used violence to solve problems and failed
to act as role models (Bunnag, 2001).
Looking at the family, the researchers suggest that parents of delinquents are often struggling to reachhigher living standards and ignore their relationships with their children. The education system is also
given some responsibility for the problems, and critics argue that the system has produced virtually nothing
except selfish individuals who strive solely for upper social status or wealth. Poor school management also
has been criticized for failing to protect students from social problems (Chaisatien, 2003). The criminal
justice system is also considered culpable for its failure in crime prevention, correction, and rehabilitation.
About 15% of juveniles released from detention are later rearrested. This reflects the practice of merely
warehousing them at detention centres where many learn to commit more serious crimes, and for
responding to the problems with only punishment (Roujanavong, 2001). Thus, criminal justice officials andlegal experts are searching for alternative and innovative approaches to delinquent corrections and juvenile
justice reformation.

II. THE THAI JUVENILE JUSTICE SYSTEM
A. Juvenile Justice System
The Thai juvenile justice system has been based on the assumption that young offenders are notconsidered to be criminally responsible for their actions and that they should not be treated the sameas adults. Children aged ten and younger are not punishable under Thai law, and the criminal code does
not allow for any kind of punishment to be levied upon any person below 14 years of age. It had been thepractice to send juvenile delinquents to a vocational school under the Primary Education Act of 1935 or toa reformation school under the Act on Instruction and Training of Certain Classes of Children of 1936 fortreatment after trial rather than having them imprisoned. However, under these provisions, treatment of thejuvenile was available only after the court’s order and there were no special provisions made for juveniles
before adjudication. Juveniles were, therefore, detained in the same detention facilities as adult criminals andthey were required to undergo the same court procedures as adults. In 1952 the Central Juvenile Court andthe Observation and Protection Center were established under the Juvenile Courts and the Juvenile Court
Procedure Act of 1951, which was later revised as the Juvenile and Family Courts Act of 1991. The Act
embraces the principle of the “best interests of the child” with respect to the protection of children and theirfamilies. A child who has committed a violation of the law shall not be regarded as an offender, consideringthat he or she is under-aged and victimized by a corrupted environment and that his or her wrongdoing
is not committed out of malice. The child can repent and express willingness to undergo correction andrehabilitation under adult care and supervision.
131

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.78

B. Guidelines for the Treatment of Juvenile Offenders
Guidelines relating to the treatment of juvenile offenders are stipulated in Articles 32 to 57 of theJuvenile and Family Court and its Procedural Code Act of 1991, which distinguish juvenile justice from thegeneral administration of justice in seven major ways:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

The consideration of a juvenile case is undertaken in confidentiality and in a room separate fromadult cases.
Some flexibility may be exercised when considering cases involving juveniles.
An investigation will be conducted into a juvenile’s social background and his or her behaviour. The
findings of the investigation will be submitted to the juvenile and family court when it considers thecase.
Juveniles under investigation or awaiting trial are kept in a detention facility that is separate fromthat of adults.
Juvenile offenders will receive both physical and psychological examinations.
The Juvenile and Family Court may change the final verdict if it deems it appropriate to do so.

The Juvenile and Family Court can consider cases involving family members (Economic and Social
Council, 1996).

III. JUVENILE CRIMINAL CASE PROCEDURE
A. Arrest
Arrests of the accused child are prohibited unless he or she committed a flagrant offence, an injured
person identified him or her and insisted on the arrest, or a warrant for arrest is made under the criminal
procedure code. After apprehension, the police officer is required by law to notify the director of the
Observation and Protection Center (OPC) and the juvenile’s parents, guardians or a person with whom he or
she is residing.
B. Inquiry and Investigation
During this process, it is required that a counsellor or legal adviser is provided for the juvenile. In
addition, the presence of a public prosecutor, psychologist or social worker and the juvenile’s parents iscompulsory during interrogation and is an essential element to protect the juvenile. The inquiry must becompleted within 24 hours from the time of arrival at the office of the inquiry official. After the inquiry, thejuvenile shall be sent to the OPC and the file of inquiry will be sent to the public prosecutor.
C. Detention and Provisional Release on BailIn general, the juvenile may be detained during the investigation at the remand home of the OPC.
The director of the OPC may keep the juvenile in custody. A request for provisional release on bail of thearrestee shall be made to the custodial authorities (Ukris, 2002).
D. Criminal Prosecution and Deferred Prosecution
The government is represented in both criminal and civil matters by public prosecutors stationed
throughout the country. The public prosecutor has to enter a charge in the JFC within 13 days from the time
the juvenile was arrested. In a case where the alleged juvenile offender escapes from custody while thecase is being conducted, the time during the escape shall not be included in the period of charging. In caseof necessity, when the charge against the offender cannot be filed within the mentioned period, the police
officer or public prosecutor shall apply by motion to the court for a deferment (extension). In case of an
offence where the minimum imprisonment is five years or more, the court may grant a longer deferment.
E. Trial
The court trial is the fact-finding process in which the truth of the guilt stated in any claim is ascertained
and used as a tool in deciding the case. The JFC has the authority to transfer an accused juvenile to the
Criminal Court for trial and adjudication after the JFC considers the juvenile’s physique, intelligence, health,and habits. The JFC has the discretion to determine that the accused juvenile has the same status as aperson who is 18 years old or older. Correspondingly, the Criminal Court may transfer any accused person
who, when the offence was committed, was not over 20 years old to the JFC when the Criminal Court
exercises its discretion that that person should be treated as a juvenile. The JFC procedure will be informal

132

139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPERTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

and simplified in the interest of the juvenile. The trial is held in private. The persons present at the trial are
the accused, parents, guardians, attorney, witnesses, prosecutor, members of the court and other persons
permitted by the court. Photographs and reports on facts presented at the proceedings are not to be released
to the public (Central Juvenile and Family Court, 1996).

F. Adjudication
The judgment process is based on two stages: the adjudication of guilt and sentencing. An adjudicationof guilt means that the court gives a judgment on whether or not an accused is guilty in accordance with the
charge. If the judge considers all the evidence and is uncertain that the accused has committed the offence,
regardless of whether the accused pleads guilty or not, he or she will dismiss the charge. On the contrary,
if the judge is certain that the accused committed the offence he or she will convict the accused and thendecide a punishment. However, after the trial is completed, prior to a judgment or an order being given, thecourt will review the social investigation report submitted by the OPC. In addition, Section 75 of the Thai
Penal Code provides that whenever any person over 14 years but not yet over 17 years of age commits any
act provided by the law to be an offence, the court shall take into account the sense of responsibility andall other things concerning him or her in order to come to a decision as to whether or not it is appropriate
to pass judgment by inflicting punishment on him or her. If the court does not deem it appropriate to pass
judgment inflicting punishment, it shall adopt other correctional measures short of punishment. If the court
deems it appropriate to pass judgment inflicting punishment, it shall reduce the scale of punishment provided
for such offence by one half. Section 76 of the same Code also states that whenever any person over 17 years
but not yet over 20 years of age commits any act provided by the law to be an offence, the court may, if it
thinks fit, reduce the scale of the punishment provided for such offence by one third or one half.
IV. TREATMENT OF SERIOUS AND VIOLENT JUVENILE OFFENDERS
Serious juvenile offenders are those who commit the following felony offences: larceny or theft, burglaryor breaking and entering, extortion, arson, and drug trafficking or other controlled dangerous substanceviolations. Violent juvenile offenders are those who commit the following felony offences: non-negligent
manslaughter, homicide, rape or other felony sex offences, mayhem, kidnapping, robbery, or aggravatedassault.
There are three principal organizations dealing with juvenile delinquents, Juvenile and Family Courts, theJuvenile Observation and Protection Department, and the Department of Probation.

A. The Juvenile and Family Courts (JFC)
The JFC has jurisdiction in any criminal case involving children aged 10 to 14 years old and youths aged
15 to 18 years of age, and also handles civil actions involving any minor (under 20 years old) under the Civil
and Commercial Code. A trial in the JFC is adjudicated by two professional judges and two lay judges, whereat least one of the four must be a female. An appeal against a judgment or order of the JFC is heard by the
Courts of Appeal. The JFC consists of the Central Juvenile and Family Court, 10 Provincial Juvenile andFamily Courts, and 31 Divisions of Juvenile and Family Court in the Provincial Courts. Thailand is divided in
to 76 provinces; therefore, in those provinces where the JFC or the juvenile and family section do not exist,
accused juveniles must be dealt with in adult courts. Definitely, the JFCs are authorized to transfer serious
and violent juvenile delinquents to criminal court or place them in adult prisons but this only happens ina few cases. The reason is that the courts have to hear the Juvenile Protection Committee’s resolution
before they exercise this authority. Additionally, all or most authorities, including the court, consider thattreating juvenile delinquents in the vein of adult criminals is actually more likely to lead to recidivism andretention in the juvenile justice system. In addition, their recidivism rates as well as the severity of theiroffences appear to increase after they are released from prison. Therefore, the great majority, or all, of thejuveniles who are found guilty as charged are placed under the responsibility of the Juvenile Observation andProtection Department, the institutional rehabilitation organization, and the Department of Probation, thenon-institutional rehabilitation organization.
B. The Juvenile Observation and Protection Department (JOPD)
The JOPD is the institution that provides care, protection, and training to juvenile offenders in
the institutions. The mandate and responsibilities of the Department include keeping juveniles underinvestigation and those awaiting trial under detention, preparing the social investigation report, and133

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.78

supervising remand homes and training schools. The JOPD consists of the Administration Divisions, theBangkok Observation and Protection Center, the Provincial Observation and Protection Centers, andJuvenile Training Centers. At present, there are 76 Observation and Protection Centers nationwide.
Normally, both serious, violent offenders and non serious, non-violent offenders have to participate in
the same basic treatment programmes. However, serious, violent juvenile offenders will be classified by aclassification form and will be placed on some proper programmes. The rehabilitation programmes in OPCs
are run by teachers, social workers, psychiatrists and doctors. Programmes include non-formal education,
instruction in moral values, art, music, and sport activities. Institutional treatments are divided into three
types: the training school, the vocational training school, and the therapeutic community centre.
1. Training Schools
There are 17 training schools throughout the country. Since juveniles are admitted to the training schools
for “reformative treatment” and are still at the stage of character formation, educational programmes are
conducted. The OPCs and school programmes aim to develop adjustment skills and life skills of inmates
through regular guidance, vocational training, education, moral and religious instruction, and recreational
activities. While most of these activities help instill specific disciplines, general discipline is encouraged
by granting or revoking rewards and privileges such as home visits, pre-release, participation in special
activities, etc. The conduct of a juvenile staying in the institutes is evaluated by means of ascertaining his
or her performance at training school in regard to study, vocational training, work, personal appearance,
language, behaviour, respect for authority, care of property, and co-operation. The director of the OPCs isempowered to send an incorrigible juvenile who is a source of danger to other juveniles for detention in a
prison.
2. Vocational Training Schools
The vocational training school under the JOPD has a capacity of 200 persons. The salient featuresemphasize positive working attitudes as well as helping juveniles to acquire work-related skills, andarrangements for juveniles to undergo a test of the Trade Standard Testing Committee, of the Ministry ofLabor and Social Welfare. The school conducts treatment and operates eight vocational training courses.
However, the enrollment schedule and number of juveniles are fixed because of the limited capacity of theinstitute.
3. The Drug Addict Treatment Center
The Drug Addict Treatment Center, the Ayudthaya Therapeutic Community Center, provides compulsory
treatment and rehabilitation programmes for juvenile addicts. The programmes are intended to restore
physical health, uproot psychological and emotional dependence on drugs, and apply the therapeuticcommunity models and techniques (Ukris, 2002).

C. The Department of Probation (DOP)
Prior to 2003, the Department of Probation’s main duties were to conduct pre-sentence investigation,
supervision, and rehabilitation only for adult probationers ordered by adult courts. Six years ago, thedepartment was reorganized in accordance with the Resolution of the Council of Ministers of 2001, which
has authorized the Department of Probation to be the principal organization of community-based corrections
for all types of offenders in communities, including juvenile probationers and juvenile parolees shifted fromthe JOPD, and adult parolees shifted from the Correctional Department. Moreover, the other new missionsof the department include the co-ordination of reintegration efforts of medical and social agencies and Drug
Rehabilitation Centers in accordance with the Drug Rehabilitation Act of 2002, and also to provide aftercare
services for offenders in communities.
The DOP consists of six technical and support units in the central administration of the department; 76
provincial probation offices nationwide; 14 leaders/or representatives of the provincial groups; and one Drug
Rehabilitation Center.
The Drug Rehabilitation Center, the other initiative of the Department of Probation starting in 2003,
has been organizing compulsory treatment for drug users under the Drug Rehabilitation Act of 2002. The
major concept is to provide arrestees who used or processed small quantities of any illicit drug and did notcommit other offences to undergo treatment like a patient instead of prosecuting them as a criminal. If the134

139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPERTICIPANTS’ PAPERS

arrestees are willing to receive treatment and relinquish their drug habits, the prosecutors will drop the
charges and the arrestees will have no criminal record and will be assisted in continuing their daily lives in
the community as ordinary people. A benefit of the compulsory treatment system is that it can provide an
opportunity to divert offenders from the general criminal justice procedure, and especially to reduce thenumber of suspects in courts and thereby to reduce the number held in jails and juvenile detention centres.
To ensure success, the Department of Probation, in its capacity as the co-ordinator of the programmes, has
worked closely with many government and non-government agencies as well as communities all over thecountry. It is believed that by concentrating seriously on rehabilitation and prevention, the compulsory drug
treatment system will be an effective strategy for curbing crime committed by drug abusers (Kittayarak,
2003; Kalyanasuta, 2002).
Probation for juveniles is commonly used for first offenders who commit a relatively minor offence.
Therefore, serious, violent juveniles come to the probation office by parole assessment. Parole is a measurefor juveniles who have been conditionally released from the training school by the decree of the JFC. The
term of parole supervision is usually up to the remaining term of his or her sentence, with early discharge
in cases of serving one quarter of the period of training with good behaviour. Screening of inmates forrelease on parole requires conditions such as good results in treatment and rehabilitation programmes, anda good home environment. Supervision of the parole process is the same as the process of supervision ofprobationers, starting with a court’s prescription of supervision conditions for juveniles, such as forbidding
them to: enter any place or locality which might corrupt them; leave their residences at night except incases of necessity; associate with any person who is deemed undesirable by the court; and do any act whichmight corrupt them. The court may also order them to present themselves from time to time to the court
or to the probation officer or social worker who was assigned by the director of the OPC, and order them topursue an education or substantial occupation.
In practice, a probation officer is to provide supervision and personal guidance or individual counsellingto juveniles through interviewing the juvenile and visiting his/her home regularly. Moreover, the probation
officer also provides group counselling, family counselling, religious training, skill-oriented programmes, andmultiple services, combinations of services or treatments that involve several different approaches, such ascommunity service, life and occupational training, restorative justice processes, and compulsory treatment
programmes for drug addicts. Therefore, the probation officer is to exercise professional skill and knowledgeof local resources to meet the juvenile’s needs and, where necessary, provide the family members withfinancial assistance, employment, etc.
In addition, the DOP has operated a volunteer scheme for probationers which aims at providing greatercommunity involvement in the rehabilitation of offenders. Under this scheme, selected volunteers provide
probationers with personal and moral support and help juveniles develop meaningful hobbies and habits,
cultivate healthy pursuits, find jobs, and provide tuition for them. Besides, the community justice network
was implemented within certain communities around the country in 2004 with the DOP’s support andunder the policy of the Ministry of Justice. These networks will assist in persuading drug users to receive
voluntary treatment without the necessity of arresting them, and will also support the treatment andaftercare of drug addicts in the compulsory system. The networks will collaborate closely with the volunteer
probation officers in the aftercare and the follow-up of drug users within the community. If they perform
well, the networks’ responsibilities will be extended to other functions such as the prevention of crime,
community mediation, etc. (Kittayarak, 2003).
Regarding the success rate of the juvenile rehabilitation programmes of the DOP, 76 per cent of juveniles
are fully discharged from probation with no violations of conditions or rearrests. Less than 7 per centbecome recidivist offenders after release from probation supervision. For JOPD’s services, there is a study
indicating that juvenile delinquents who participated in group counselling showed a significantly greater
increase in self-concept than the juvenile delinquents who did not. (Kanchana, 1992). Additionally, theresults of a study found that juvenile delinquent recidivists had an average age of 17.1 years, graduated fromthe sixth grade and largely committed drug and narcotics offences. Environmental factors after release fromthe juvenile centres, such as associating with their peer groups, financial status and types of delinquency,
were significantly related to recidivism. However, factors of family relationship, residential location andtraining in Central Observation and Protection Centers had no relation to recidivism (Ruangchai, 2000).

135RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.78

Both institutional and non-institutional rehabilitation organizations are faced with the same difficulties inproviding more effective intervention or treatments for serious, violent juveniles. The major difficulties arelegal measures which are not suitable for rehabilitation of juveniles in conflict with the law to reintegrate
into society (Suphunsa, 2004); lack of juvenile rehabilitation administration personnel such as counsellors,
psychologists, criminologists, or sociologists (which are not in proportion to the number of juveniles in
the criminal justice system); and lack of advanced skill for implementing special programmes focusing on
matters such as interpersonal skills, social interactional skills, aggression replacement training, etc.

V. CONCLUSION
Crime rates seem to parallel the growth of industrialization, urbanization, and globalization, especiallywhen the economy is unstable. Along with this growth, juvenile delinquency, especially serious, violent
juvenile delinquency, increases. In addition, more serious crimes are being committed by ever-younger
children. Therefore, effective treatments play an essential role in any strategy designed to diminish therates of juvenile delinquency. Currently, the Thai criminal justice system, including juvenile justice, is in theprocess of reorganization and performance redesign. Additionally, many innovations are being created andadopted; many national laws and practices dealing with juveniles are being raised to international standards
for the administration of juvenile justice and to break the cycle of youth crime. Nonetheless, reforming thecriminal justice system alone will never solve crime and the juvenile delinquent problem because, in one
way or another, crime is a symptom of social disorganization. As such, other social issues, especially the gap
between urban and rural living standards and disparities in income distribution, must be addressed by thegovernment.

136

139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPERTICIPANTS’ PAPERSREFERENCES
Bunnag, S. (2001). “Parents Blamed for Rise in Number of Young Criminals.” Thai Youth Issues inThailand . See: www.thailandlife.com/thaiyouth.html (9/5).
Central Juvenile and Family Court (1996). Guide to the Juvenile and Family Court and the Protection
Centre of Thailand . Bangkok: Grangrow Printing.
Chaisatien, A. (2003). “Bring Them Up Right.” Thai Youth Issues in Thailand .
www.thailandlife.com/thaiyouth.html (6/19).
Charoenpo, A. (2003). “Families Set to Have Rehab Role.” Bangkok Post (6/6). Pathumwan, Bangkok.
Futrakul,V. (2003). Fact Sheet on the Royal Thai Government Anti-Narcotic Drugs Policy . Ministry ofForeign Affairs of Thailand, (Narathip3/3).
Hanpanyapichit, S. and B. Somsin (2003). “Police on Holiday Youth Patrol” The Nation (5/8). Bang Na,
Bangkok: Nation Multimedia Group.
Kalyanasuta, K. (2002). “The criminal justice system and community-based treatment of offenders in
Thailand” Paper presented at the United Nations Asia and Far East Institute For the Prevention of Crimeand the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI), Fuchu, Tokyo, Japan.
Kanchana Imsumranrach (1992). “Effects of group counseling on juvenile delinquents’ self-concept”.
Thesis (M.Ed.), Chulalongkorn University.
Kittayarak, K. (2003)). “Restorative Justice: The Thai Experience”. UNAFEI Resource Material Series
No.63. Fuchu, Tokyo, Japan.
Office of the Judiciary (2004). The Judiciary of Thailand . Retrieved 14 October 2004 from:http://www.judiciary.go.th/eng/engjud.htm
Na Mahachai, S. (2003, June 19). “Fighting: the first solution.” The Nation (6/19). Bang Na, Bangkok:
Nation Multimedia Group.
Prinya Lernguthai (2001). “Factors affecting the conforming of delinquent juveniles to the rules of theCentral Protection and Observation Center: a case study of Ban Karuna training school for boys” Thesis,
Chulalongkorn University.
Public Relations Department (2003). THAILAND: International Narcotics Control Strategy Report .
Bangkok: Office of the Prime Minister, Thailand.
Puttidej Bunkrapue (1999).“Factors relating to the incidence of violent crime among delinquent youth”
Thesis (M.A. (Sociology)), Chulalongkorn University.
Rojanaphruk, P. (2001, July 9). “Teenage methamphetamine users” The Nation (7/9). Bang Na, Bangkok:
Nation Multimedia Group.
Roujanavong, W. (2001). “Alternative Juvenile Justice: Innovative Approaches to Delinquent
Corrections”. Paper presented at the Ministry of Justice seminar, Bangkok.
Ruangchai Ruangpaisan, Pol. Capt. (2000). “Social factors affecting recidivism of juvenile delinquency:a case study of the central observation and protection center in Bangkok metropolis” Thesis (M.A.
(Sociology)), Chulalongkorn University.

137

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.78

Suphunsa Somsee (2004). “Legal measures on rehabilitation of children in conflict with the law throughcommunity, offender and victim involvement”, Thesis (LL.M.), Chulalongkorn University, 2004.
Tulyawasipong. S (2002). More Children turn to Selling Drugs: Children’s Problems . Foundation for Child
Development: Bangkok.
Ukris, D. (2002). “Juvenile Justice System in Thailand.” UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 59 andAnnual Report for 2000. Fuchu, Tokyo, Japan.

138