On April 18, 2024, French Prime Minister Gabriel Attal visited Viry-Châtillon in Essonne, where a 15-year-old named Shemseddine had recently died, and outlined the government’s plan to address youth violence following a consultation requested by President Emmanuel Macron. Attal called for a “surge of authority” and discussed measures to hold parents of delinquent minors accountable and adapt juvenile justice rules to address the increasing violence.
Attal emphasized three key points aimed at “zero impunity” and “immediate sanction.” These included the possibility of immediate appearance before a court for youth aged 16 and older, the consideration of a penalty agreement without a judge for minors aged 13 and older, and potential modifications to the mitigating circumstances of minority without providing specifics. The principle of minor penalty, which mandates a reduced sentence for minors compared to adults, was also discussed, highlighting potential changes to the legal treatment of juvenile offenders compared to adults.
The idea of removing or lowering the age threshold for the mitigating circumstances of minority has been a longstanding debate within right-wing and far-right political circles. Critics argue that such a move would undermine the unique aspects of juvenile justice, such as a more protective legal process and specialized juvenile courts. However, some experts note that recent calls for closer alignment of juvenile and adult legal processes, including immediate court appearances for 16-year-olds, may challenge the existing legal framework for juvenile justice.
Frédéric Debove, codirector of the Academy of Internal Security at Pantheon-Assas University, highlights the Constitutional Council’s 2002 decision affirming the fundamental principles of juvenile justice, including the supremacy of educational measures over punitive ones and the importance of age-appropriate legal proceedings. The concept of a bifurcated legal process for minors, where guilt is decided separately from sentencing after an educational phase, may be at risk due to proposals for immediate court appearances for 16-year-olds.
The government’s focus on addressing youth violence through a more punitive approach has raised concerns among legal experts and child advocacy groups regarding the potential erosion of the autonomy and specialized protections afforded by the current juvenile justice system. The shift towards aligning juvenile and adult legal processes, including proposals for immediate court appearances and modifications to mitigating circumstances for minors, may signal a significant departure from the established principles of juvenile justice in France. It remains to be seen how these proposed changes will be implemented and their impact on the protection and rehabilitation of young offenders.
