IMPACT OF INCONGRUOUS JAIL ENVIRONMENT ON

THE JUVENILE PRISONERS IN SELECTED JAILS OF

KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, PAKISTAN

Submitted By
IHSAN ULLAH KHAN
Ph.D Scholar

Supervised By
PROF. DR. NIAZ MUHAMMAD

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR
(2013-14)
 IMPACT OF INCONGRUOUS JAIL ENVIRONMENT ON
THE JUVENILE PRISONERS IN SELECTED JAILS OF
KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA, PAKISTAN

Submitted By
IHSAN ULLAH KHAN

A dissertation submitted to the University of Peshawar in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy In Sociology

Supervisor
PROF. DR. NIAZ MUHAMMAD

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF PESHAWAR
(2013-14)
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I am deeply indebted to Almighty Allah who provided me the courage and ability to

undertake this herculean task. With profound gratitude, I wish to thank some fabulous

people who encouraged and helped me throughout this research journey.

My special thanks are due to my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Niaz Muhammad, Chairman

Department of Sociology, University of Peshawar, who consistently and thoroughly

checked each and every point of my PhD dissertation till its accomplishment. It is

worth-underscoring that without his ideas and guidance, the hectic job of undertaking

the PhD research would have never been possible.

I deeply value the sincere contribution and support of Dr. Aimee Wodda, Dr. Jessica

Bird, Department of Criminology, Law and Justice, University of Illinois at Chicago,

US, Mansoor, Majid Khan, Sajjad Hussain, Fawad Khan, Sajjad Ahmad, Muhammad

Uzair, Asghar Khan, Zahid Amin and Mansoor Ahmad, Department of Sociology,

University of Peshawar who left no stone unturned in regard to providing academic

help as and when I needed. My heartfelt gratitude is for my mother and brothers who

provided me the emotional and financial support in accomplishing this task.

Ihsan Ullah Khan

i
 ABSTRACT
This study titled as ―Impact of Incongruous Jail Environment on the Juvenile

Prisoners in Selected Jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan‖ was conducted with the

aim of evaluating the impact of an incongruous jail environment on the multiple

aspects of juveniles‘ lives who are undergoing incarceration on charges of different

kinds of crime. The study was carried out by using mixed methods research approach

with concurrent triangulation strategy. Quantitative data was collected through an

interview schedule from 132 juvenile prisoners whereas qualitative data was collected

from 50 participants through in-depth interviews (IDIs), including juvenile prisoners,

jail staff, probation officers and legal counsels. Quantitative data was analyzed

through frequencies and percentages under the uni-variate analysis and chi-square test

was applied for the association of dependent and independent variables under bi-

variate analysis. Qualitative data was analyzed through transcribing the data and

identification of themes for interpretation. The results of the quantitative and

qualitative data were compared and discussed through the proper procedure of the

concurrent triangulation strategy. The findings reveal that different elements of living

conditions in the jails were not satisfactory. The association of these different

elements was found significant with the well-being of juveniles i.e. the availability of

clean drinking water and enough water for other cleaning purposes, unsatisfactory

toilet facilities, low quality and lack of proper food and diseases caused by that food.

Juveniles complained of unfair attitudes of jail staff who dealt with them in a cruel

and humiliating manner. There were no exclusive facilities to house the juveniles like

Borstal Institution. Rather than rehabilitative treatment, juveniles faced physical

punishment like beating etc. They were fearful of jail staff; experienced unhealthy and

unsanitary conditions due to overcrowded jail conditions. Many juveniles had no

ii
knowledge about their rights and often did not know they could access free legal

assistance from government. They experienced unhealthy and abusive behavior at the

hands of jail staff and police and had to bribe jail staff to ensure access to justice

agents. Furthermore, juvenile cases were tried at the adult courts where they

experienced treatment like adult prisoners, including public hearing of their cases,

unsatisfactory trials, and mental suffering from lengthy and costly hearing of their

suits. Juveniles complained of multiple problems in view of non-existence of

privileges as stated in the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) promulgated in

2000 in Pakistan. Juveniles endorsed that they established relations with adult

prisoners and gangs at jail due to the absence of proper check and balance over the

interaction of juveniles. This absence led to frankness of juveniles sharing of drugs

with adult prisoners and gangs at jail; and physical and financial support to juveniles

by these gangsters. Although agents of the justice system did not agree to the above-

mentioned situation, the jail staff contended as these were going against them. The

study recommends promulgation of JJSO in letter and spirit.

iii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgments...................................................................................................... i
Abstract ...................................................................................................................... ii
Table of Contents ...................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables ............................................................................................................viii

Chapter- I ................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Trends in the Age of Juveniles ..................................................................................
2
1.2 Rehabilitation of Juveniles ........................................................................................
4
1.3 Rehabilitation of Juveniles ........................................................................................
5
1.4 Statistics Regarding Prison Population .....................................................................
6
1.5 Statistics of Jails in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa ................................................................
9
1.6 Salient Features of JJSO 2000, in Pakistan ...............................................................
11
1.7 Statement of the Problem ..........................................................................................
13
1.8 Significance of the Study ..........................................................................................
14
1.9 Aims and Objectives of the Study .............................................................................
15
1.10 Research Questions ...................................................................................................
15
1.11 Conceptual Framework .............................................................................................
16
1.12 Humiliation of Juveniles in Correction Institutions of KP........................................
16
1.13 Limitations of the Study ............................................................................................
16
1.14 Future Research Prospect in the Study Area .............................................................
17
1.15 Organization of the Study .........................................................................................
17

Chapter – II .............................................................................................................. 20
LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 20
2.1 Living Condition at Prisons ......................................................................................
20
2.1.1 Young People in Prisons ..................................................................................
21
2.1.2 Prison Over-crowding ......................................................................................
21
2.1.3 Mistreatment towards Prisoners .......................................................................
23

iv
 2.1.4 Ventilation in the Facility.................................................................................
26
2.2 Attitude of Jail Staff ..................................................................................................
26
2.3 Juvenile Jails (Borstal Institutions) for Juveniles......................................................
35
2.4 Delayed Justice..........................................................................................................
39
2.5 Lack of Exclusive Juvenile Courts ............................................................................
48
2.5.1 The Role of Juvenile Courts in the Services ....................................................
49
2.5.2 Trends towards Juvenile Courts .......................................................................
50
2.5.3 Probation and Juvenile Courts .........................................................................
50
2.5.4 Juvenile Courts in Pakistani Context ...............................................................
51
2.6 Relation with Gangsters ............................................................................................
52
2.6.1 Nature of Gangs at Prisons ...............................................................................
52
2.6.2 Role of Prison Gang in the Formal Correction Institutions .............................
54
2.6.3 Prison Gangs and Violence ..............................................................................
54
2.6.4 Victimization of Inmates ..................................................................................
56
2.6.5 Gangs in Juvenile Correctional Facilities ........................................................
56
2.6.6 Youth Gang Proliferation .................................................................................
57
2.6.7 Problems faced by Gangs in Juvenile Correctional Facilities ..........................
57
2.6.8 Factors leading to Membership of a Gang .......................................................
58
2.6.9 Risk Factors for Gang Membership .................................................................
58
2.6.10 Impacts of Juvenile Gangs .............................................................................
60
2.6.11 Relation of Juveniles with Gangs in Pakistani Context .................................
61
2.7 Well-being of Juveniles.............................................................................................
64
2.7.1 Social Marginalization .....................................................................................
67
2.7.2 Recidivism........................................................................................................
74
2.7.3 Psychological Well-being of Juveniles ............................................................
81
2.7.4 Sexual Violence ...............................................................................................
87
2.7.5 Health ...............................................................................................................
94
2.7.6 Education..........................................................................................................
100
2.8 Synthesis of Literature Review .................................................................................
106

v
Part-II........................................................................................................................107
LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................107
2.9 Theoretical Framework .............................................................................................
107
2.9.1 Sampson and Laub‘s Age-Graded Theory of Informal Social
Control and Cumulative Disadvantage .....................................................................
107
2.9.2 Catalano and Hawkins Social Development Model .........................................
108
2.9.3 Labeling Theory ...............................................................................................
108
2.9.4 Total Institution Theory by Erving Goffman ...................................................
109

Chapter-III ...............................................................................................................110
METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................110
3.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................
110
3.2 Research Philosophy/Paradigm .................................................................................
110
3.2.1 Positivism .........................................................................................................
112
3.2.2 Quantitative Research ......................................................................................
115
3.2.3 Naturalism/Interpretivism ................................................................................
116
3.2.4 Qualitative Research ........................................................................................
117
3.2.5 Pragmatism .......................................................................................................
119
3.2.6 Ontology and Epistemology in Mixed Methods Research ..............................
120
3.2.7 Mixed Methods Research .................................................................................
122
3.2.8 Purposes of Mixed Methods.............................................................................
124
3.2.9 Triangulation ....................................................................................................
124

3.3 128
Universe of the study ................................................................................................
3.4 128
Sample Size and Sampling Procedures .....................................................................
129
3.4.1 Proportional Allocation Method Formula ........................................................
2.5 130
Tools of Data Collection ...........................................................................................
130
2.5.1 Primary Data Collection Methods ....................................................................
131
2.5.2 Secondary Data Collection Methods ................................................................
131
2.5.3 Quantitative Tool of Data Collection ...............................................................
2.5.4 Qualitative Tools of Data Collection ...............................................................
132

vi
3.6 Data Analyses ............................................................................................................
133
3.6.1 Chi-square Test ................................................................................................
134
3.7 Ethical Consideration ................................................................................................
135
Chapter – IV .............................................................................................................138
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ............................................................................138
4.1 Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents .....................................................
138
4.2 Uni-Variate Analysis .................................................................................................
147
4.3 Bi-Variate and Thematic Analyses ...........................................................................
172

Chapter-V .............................................................................................. 259

SUMMARY CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......... 259
5.1 Summary ...................................................................................................................
259
5.2 Conclusion.................................................................................................................
268
5.3 Recommendations .....................................................................................................
270
5.3.1 Recommendations for Public Policy/Government Authority ..........................
271
5.3.2 Recommendations for Non-Governmental Organizations ...............................
272
5.3.3 Recommendations for Jail Staff .......................................................................
272
5.3.4 Recommendations for Legal Counsel ..............................................................
273
5.3.5 Recommendations for Judges ..........................................................................
273
5.3.6 Recommendations for Probation Officers ........................................................
274
5.3.7 Recommendations for Community ..................................................................
274

REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 275

Annexure-I .................................................................................................................314
Annexure-II (A) .........................................................................................................328
Annexure-II (B) .........................................................................................................330
Annexure-II (C) .........................................................................................................333
Annexure-II (D) .........................................................................................................335

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table No. 1.1 List of confined Prisoners in LP jails Jan, 2015 ........................................ 10
Table No. 3.1 Contrasting positivist and naturalist axioms (beliefs and assumptions) .. 115
Table No. 3.2 Terms generally associated with qualitative and quantitative research ... 118
Table No 3.3 (a)Breakup of the Quantitative Study Respondents ................................. 129
Table No. 3.3 (b)Breakup of the Qualitative Study Respondents ................................... 130
Table No. 4.1.1 Age of the respondents.......................................................................... 139
Table No. 4.1.2 Education of the Respondents ............................................................... 139
Table No. 4.1.3 Type of Residential Area of the Respondents....................................... 140
Table No. 4.1.4 Family Type of the Respondents .......................................................... 140
Table No. 4.1.5 Life Status of Parents of Sampled Respondents ................................... 140
Table No. 4.1.6 Family Atmosphere of Respondents ..................................................... 141
Table No. 4.1.7 Fathers‘Current Occupation, if alive..................................................... 141
Table No. 4.1.8 Mothers‘ Occupation, if alive ............................................................... 142
Table No. 4.1.9 Educational Status of Respondents‘ Fathers ......................................... 142
Table No. 4.1.10 Mother‘s Education ............................................................................. 143
Table No. 4.1.11 Family Size of Juvenile Respondents ................................................. 143
Table No. 4.1.12 Family‘s Monthly Income from all Resources ................................... 144
Table No. 4.1.13 Nature of Crime by Juveniles ............................................................. 144
Table No. 4.1.14 Status of the Juveniles‘ Suits .............................................................. 145
Table No. 4.1.16 Time Span/Length of Juvenile Trials .................................................. 145
Table No. 4.1.17 Duration of Staying at Jails ................................................................. 146
Table No. 4.2.1 Living Condition Confronting Juvenile Prisoners at Jail ...................... 147
Table No. 4.2.2 Attitude of Jail Staff towards Juvenile Inmates .................................... 150
Table No. 4.2.3 Lack of Juvenile Prisons (Borstal Institution) ...................................... 152
Table No. 4.2.4 Awareness and Problems Related to Delayed Justice System .............. 154
Table No. 4.2.5 Lack of Exclusive Juvenile Courts and Associated Problems .............. 156
Table No. 4.2.6 Juveniles‘ Relation with Gangsters and their Effects on them ............. 158
Table No. 4.2.7 Social Marginalization and Associated Factors .................................... 160
Table No. 4.2.8 Recidivist Acts of Juveniles aftertheir Release ..................................... 162
Table No. 4.2.9 Challenges to Psychological Well-being of Juveniles .......................... 164
Table No. 4.2.10 Vulnerability and Practice of Juveniles‘ Sexual Abuse at Jails .......... 166

viii
Table No. 4.2.11 Health Care Facility at Jails ................................................................ 168
Table No. 4.2.12 Educational and Vocational Facilities at Jail ...................................... 170
Table No. 4.3.1 Association between Living Condition of Jail and Well-being of
Juveniles.......................................................................................................................... 172
Table No. 4.3.2Association between Attitude of Jail Staff and Well-being of juveniles.187
Table No. 4.3.3 Association between Exclusive Prisons and Well-being of juveniles .. 200
Table No. 4.3.4 Association between Delayed Justice and Well-being of juveniles...... 214
Table No. 4.3.5Association between Exclusive Courts and Well-being of Juveniles .... 228
Table No. 4.3.6 Association between Relation of Juveniles with Gangsters and Well-
being of Juveniles ........................................................................................................... 242

ix
Chapter- I

INTRODUCTION

Crime or delinquency is a ubiquitous phenomenon across the world, while

penalty or punishment is the resultant phenomenon of that criminal behavior awarded

under the existing legal system. Awardees of punishment are bound to undergo prison

sentences where the inmate‘s life is susceptible to divergent situations that deeply

affect their personalities. Juvenile prisoners are adversely affected by prison sentences

as their incarceration leads to stigma and often leaves them on the margins of society.

Historically, children were treated the same as the adults treated in the

criminal justice system. In the early 20th century, children in Australia were treated as

the same as adults, subjected to the same penalties and hard labor work (Carrington &

Pereira, 2009). Schlossman (1983) argued that before the 19th century, juveniles were

treated as adults; criminalized and imprisoned in adult prison in case of conviction. At

the start of the nineteenth century, most countries established separate work farms and

reform schools for juvenile offenders; however, some countries still keep juveniles in

adult jails. This circumstance means that juveniles are not rehabilitated. Rather, their

frequent interaction with adult criminals reinforces their criminal tendencies and they

consequently stand as recidivists. In 1899, the U.S was the first country to establish a

special court for juveniles in Chicago, with two basic principles: the juveniles are not

so mature to take responsibility of their action and secondly, they were deemed to be

rehabilitated more easily than the adult criminals.

Furthermore, this separate justice system in the United States put greater

emphasis on the well-being of juveniles. Specialized training centers and schools were

developed for juveniles to treat them separately from adult inmates. In these training

1
schools, the rehabilitative environment provided to juveniles included educational,

psychological and vocational facilities. In the beginning of the 1980s, juvenile crime

rates increased in most of the societies in different countries. In 1987, the arrest rate

increased of both females and males till the mid-1990s (Austin, Johnson & Gregoriou,

2000, p. 9).

Over a time period of nearly a century, since a separate justice system was

introduced in the U.S, these principles remained a standard for the juvenile justice. At

the beginning of 1990s, the get-tough approach was adopted by many states in

rejoinder to the progressively more vicious crimes of children. Some of the states

adopted legislation permitting minors to be treated as adult prisoners. Under certain

circumstances, some states have provided legal counsels to treat juveniles as adults,

particularly in states such as Indiana, South Dakota, and Vermont (Phelps, 2002).

Since 1992 in the US, forty-five (45) states have amended their legislation to

treat juveniles as adults. The number of juveniles restrained in adult prisons then

doubled in the ensuing decade. This fact challenges the belief, enshrined in the U.S a

century before those juveniles must be adjudicated and restrained in a separate justice

system and attention must be paid to their counseling and rehabilitation (Austin et al.,

2000, p. 5).

1.1 Trends in the Age of Juveniles

Article one (1) of The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Child

(UNCRC) defines a child as a human being under the age of 18 years unless under the

law pertinent to the child, majority is attained earlier (OHCHR, 1989). Moreover, the

convention deals with the rights of juveniles against different threats to their proper

mental and physical growth. It is essential to note that the US is one of only two

2
countries in the United Nations not to have ratified this convention; due to a non-

functioning government Somalia has been unable to ratify this convention

(Winterdyk, 2005).

There is considerable difference in global approaches to the imprisonment of

children and their age of criminal liability. There are differences in criminal

responsibilities in various European countries; these vary from 8 years in Scotland to

16 years in Portugal. Some European countries (e.g., Italy) do not include juveniles in

their jail population statistics. In other nations, the supervision of juveniles is taken up

by specially-designated bodies rather than the national jail services (e.g., Youth

Justice Board in England and Wales) (Hawley, Murphy & Souto-Otero, 2013). The

Youth Justice System in Wales and England works to avoid offending of juveniles.

The system is quite different from the adult justice system and is intended to tackle

the needs of young people (Ministry of Justice of England, 2015).

The definition of ―juvenile offender‖ varies across the world. In Canada, the

age of criminal responsibility is twelve years while it ranges from six to twelve years

in the United States of America. For minor offenses, a Juvenile Detention Center is

considered a more suitable place as compared to Adult Correctional Facility (US

Justice Rule, 2012). Juvenile detention centers are short-term places where juveniles

are kept during the judicial process and they wait till judgment of their cases (Finley,

2007).

In Pakistan the age of criminal responsibility is set as seven years. This means

that any child above seven years is supposed to understand that their actions are

criminal, and they should be charged according to the existing law. However, Section

83 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) states: ―nothing is an offence which is done by a

3
child above seven years of age and under twelve, who has not attained sufficient

maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of his conduct on that

occasion‖. Hence, if a child is between 7 to 12 years of age, the judge in authority has

the judgment to establish whether the child has attained sufficient maturity before

child can be charged and tried as an accused adult (Abiad & Mansoor, 2010).

Additionally, Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Codes (CPC) provides an

exceptional concession for offenders less than 16 years of age regarding bail in the

case of non-bailable offences. The Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO), 2000,

which over rides all existing laws concerning the juveniles, defines ―a child [as] a

person below 18 years of age‖ (Jabeen, 2013).

The full bench of the Lahore High Court (LHC) struck down the JJSO 2000,

after holding it as impracticable, unreasonable and un-constitutional because of

downright absurdities, wreaking disorder on the country‘s criminal justice system.

The Supreme Court of Pakistan has suspended the LHC judgment temporarily in 2005

in view of appeals filed by NGOs working for child rights protection. These appeals

are yet to be decided (Tanoli, 2014).

1.2 Rehabilitation of Juveniles

The United Nation (U.N.) Rules for the Protection of Juveniles, regarding the

maintenance and rehabilitation of juveniles, maintains that there should be a physical

environment allowing for sensory stimuli, participation in sports, opportunity for

association with peers, privacy of inmate juveniles, and provision of leisure time and

physical exercise. Furthermore, the juveniles have the right to be provided with a

separate bed which is hygienically clean. Juveniles deserve the rights of proper

socialization and education, too, as they can return to society with the ability to

4
perform their role in an effective manner. Furthermore, juveniles have the right to

undertake practical skills like vocational training to prepare them for future

employment. The U.N. Rules also provide for remedial and preventive health care

(U.N. Rules, 1990).

Preventing juveniles from further commission of crimes and to minimize the

recidivism rate of juveniles, there should be given proper attention to juveniles in a

bid to make them normal and productive citizens of the community (Murray, 2009). It

is now a global opinion that juveniles need to be treated as juveniles and be kept

separate from the adult prisoners because of their immaturity and inexperience

(Carrington & Pereira, 2009).

1.3 Problems Faced by Prisons in Pakistan

There are numerous problems associated with housing prisoners in jails; these

include financial and administrative problems. Security devices such as close circuit

televisions (CCTV) are often absent and if present, they are non-functional (Human

Rights Commission of Pakistan [HRCP], 2011).

Akbar and Bhutta (2012) found that inmates cannot meet with their family

members without giving bribes to jail staff. They found that most of the basic

facilities in Pakistani jails were not provided to inmates like ambulances to shift

prisoners with serious illnesses to the hospital nor were there police vans to carry

prisoners to courts. Most of the children are detained with adult prisoners because

there is no specific facility to house juveniles. Due to the lack of interest of jail

authorities, most impoverished juveniles cannot consult counsel for their trials. The

World Organization Against Torture reports that evidence received from NGOs

5
demonstrates that in tribal areas of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, practices used against

children are against the JJSO, 2000.

Training of jail staff at home and out of the country is not feasible. Critical

infrastructure and services are lacking in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. For example, the

region needs to establish new medical laboratories, water plants are insufficient or not

functional, hepatitis/AIDS/HIV prevention programs should be started, and

educational programs need to be renewed and modernized (HRCP, 2011).

1.4 Statistics Regarding Prison Population

There is no statistical data available to determine the numbers of juvenile

delinquents worldwide as different countries have different laws and standards

regarding the age of a child. But statistics regarding prisoners worldwide and for most

of the states of the world are available. There are more than 10.35 million prisoners

across the world excluding Somalia, Eritrea, and North Korea due to missing data and

excluding China and Guinea Bissau where the data are incomplete. United States is

the country with highest ratio of prison population which is 898 per 100,000 followed

by the Seychelles 799 per 100,000 whereas Pakistan has 43 prisoners per 100,000

(Walmsley, 2015, p. 2).

According to the World Prison Brief (2015), there are 2,217,947 prisoners in

the United States of America, which is the highest in any country of the world. China

has the second largest prison population with 1,649,804, and Russia is third in this list

having 651,464. Pakistan is seventeenth on the list with a prison population of 80,169.

Noor and Lodhi (2014) have reported that there are 3800 juvenile prisoners in

the age group of 15-18 years in different jails in Pakistan. The embarrassing factor is

6
that the overall accommodation capacity of prisoners in all jails across the country is

45,587 but 77,504 prisoners have been accommodated there, which is 170 % of the

authorized accommodation in prisons (Bergenstrom et al., 2015). Pakistan‘s prisons

are most severely overcrowded in places like the Central Prison in Peshawar which

holds 2150 prisoners, 5 times more than its actual capacity (Farooq, 2015).

There are 82 jails in Pakistan and out of them 41 were established during the

British regime. As far as juvenile prisons are concerned, at present there are only

three juvenile prisons (i.e. Borstal Institutions) in operation in Karachi, Faisalabad,

and Bahawalpur. The Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has also established one

such juvenile facility in Bannu but it is still non-functional (Fayyazuddin, Jilani &

Jilani, 1998).

The degree of torment for juveniles in police lockup, much of which remains

unreported, is alarming. A team of medical doctors, who interviewed 200 children in

Karachi in the Industrial School, found that about 60 percent of the children had been

tortured including severe beating, electric shock, handing, and sometimes police beat

them with kicks (Malik & Shirazi, 2010, p. 51).

According to Akbar and Bhutta (2012), number of problems exists in the jail

environment in Pakistan. For instance, prisons house 35,000 more prisoners than their

capacity allows. About 50,000 to 78,000 inmates were waiting to face judges for their

trials due to the increasing rate of crime in Pakistan. Prisons are considered fertile

places that produce severe kinds of criminals. Upon their release from jail offenders

may become dangerous criminals instead of refined citizens. The condition becomes

very dangerous due to complicated procedural laws and a lethargic criminal justice

system. The National Academy of Prison Administration (NAPA) is the only jail staff

7
training institute in the whole of Pakistan. There is an acute shortage of budget and

administrative staff. As a result, incompetence and dishonesty remain firmly in place

at jails.

After the introduction of JJSO, 2000, the number of juvenile inmates in

Pakistan decreased. For instance, in 2002, two years after JJSO, 2000 was introduced,

there were about 4,980 children in prisons, but in 2010, and the number of children in

jails was reduced by more than half of the above figure. In 2011, there were about

1,225 juvenile inmates, of whom 151 were convicted and 1,074 were on remand

(SPARC, 2011).

In Sindh, there are 22 Prisons. The first jail was constructed by the British

Government in 1894 with the capacity of 1527 inmates. In 1899 Karachi Central Jail

was constructed with the capacity of 1691 inmates. In 1916 District Jail of

Nawabshah was constructed. In Sukkur, there are two jails, the first one was built in

1904 and the second one was constructed in 1941. Nara Jail was constructed in 1942

before the partition of Pakistan. The remaining 16 Jails were constructed by the

government of Pakistan between 1949 and 2009 (Malik & Shirazi, 2010, p. 50).

Aziz and Khan (2008) reported that 80 out of 153 convicted juveniles were

sentenced in three provinces (i.e. KP, Sindh and Punjab), as per the data taken from

the offices of the Inspector General of Jails. Most of the juveniles are behind bars for

crimes ranging from kite flying, one wheeling, mobile snatching, and petty thefts to

more serious offences such as drug trafficking, rape, kidnapping, and murder. Behind

bars juveniles are often treated like criminals for engaging in minor negative acts; jail

staff does not deal with them like minors and human beings. Basic rights and needs

like recreation facilities, education, respect, safety, dignity and health are not provided

to these juveniles (Aziz & Khan, 2008, p. 50).

8
1.5 Statistics of Jails in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
According to SPARC (2015), in all jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) the

authorized accommodation for total prisoners is 8091 in which the authorized space

for male prisoners is 7793 and for female prisoners is 298. In 2015, the prisoners‘

population was 9503 in which the total male prisoners were 9320 and female

prisoners were 183. Prisoners under trial in all 22 jails of KP numbered 6427, with

6009 adult prisoners, 137 of whom were female, and 281 juvenile prisoners. Of the

2884 convicted prisoners in 2015, there were 2800 male adults, 46 female adults, 31

juvenile prisoners, with the remaining 7 being civil prisoners. The total number of

condemned prisoners was 189 and 03 were foreign prisoners in all jails of KP.

9
 Table 1.1 List of confined Prisoners in KP jails Jan 2015

Name of Jail Authorized Prisoner Under Trial Prisoner Convicted Prisoner Condemn
Accommodation Population Prisoner

Female Juvenile

Female Juvenile
Female Adult

Male Juvenile

Male Juvenile
Female Adult

Female adult
Male Adult

Male Adult

Male Adult
Female

Female
Total

Total
Male

Male
Civil
Peshawar 820 30 850 2184 43 2227 1445 42 80 0 645 1 8 0 0 6 0

DI Khan 1493 13 1506 384 0 384 243 0 23 0 114 0 0 0 0 4 0

Bannu 690 30 720 730 24 754 247 19 5 0 449 5 5 0 0 24 0

Haripur 1537 60 1597 1855 37 1892 333 4 9 0 1364 33 13 0 0 134 0

Chitral 152 12 164 90 2 92 81 2 3 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 0

Mansehra 459 26 485 571 9 580 514 9 46 0 9 0 0 0 1 1 0

Kohat 480 20 500 499 0 499 408 0 20 0 69 0 1 0 0 0 0

Timergara 240 10 250 509 22 531 444 17 8 0 34 5 0 0 3 20 0

Mardan 308 6 314 596 15 611 554 15 22` 0 17 0 0 0 3 0 0

Karak 217 10 227 155 0 155 123 0 2 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0

Daggar
135 10 145 206 6 212 173 6 13 0 17 0 3 0 0 0 0
Buner

Lakki Marwt 99 0 99 227 0 227 211 0 10 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0

Charsadda 114 6 120 234 12 246 225 10 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 0 0

Batagram 107 11 118 50 0 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Dassu
200 10 210 47 0 47 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kohistan

Dir (Upper) 60 0 60 105 0 105 97 0 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0

Tank 12 1 13 52 0 52 50 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Swabi 70 5 75 417 8 425 386 8 20 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nowshara 130 0 130 302 0 302 280 0 12 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0

Malakand 95 5 100 107 5 112 98 5 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0

Swat 175 25 200 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Abbotabad 200 8 208 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Total 7793 298 8091 9320 183 9503 6009 137 281 0 2800 46 31 0 7 189 0

SPARC, 2015)

10
1.6 Salient Features of JJSO 2000, in Pakistan
The British India Reformatory Schools Act of 1897 emphasized the

establishment of Remand Homes, Reform Schools, Certified Schools, Industrial

Schools, and Borstal Institutions. After the inception of Pakistan in 1947, only the

idea of Reform Schools has been transported. Industrial Schools have been opened in

the province of Sindh under the Sindh Children Act of 1955. The Punjab Government

has also established Industrial Schools under the Punjab Youthful Offenders

Ordinance, 1983 (Parekh, 1999).

Pakistan ratified The UNCRC in 1990. Not long afterward, the government of

Pakistan instituted JJSO 2000, to allow offenders below the age of 18 years to benefit

from special treatment in the eyes of law, dissimilar to treatment received by the adult

criminals, to give a chance to these juveniles to go back to their normal lives. It is

important to mention that although the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) was

introduced in 2000, juvenile offenders continue to be treated like adult criminals. This

practice goes against the provisions of this law (Ramzan, 2014).

In Pakistan, juvenile inmates fall under the realm of the JJSO 2000. The rules

apply to four provinces of Pakistan but do not apply to Provincial Administered Tribal

Areas (PATA) of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Federally Administered Tribal Areas

(FATA). After the introduction of the JJSO in the Musharraf government, only Sindh

and Punjab moved for separate juvenile justice legislation (International Crisis Group,

2011).

Section 3(1) of the JJSO 2000, requires that the government take responsibility

for providing free legal support to minor offenders, but to date juvenile offenders are

not supported. Section 4(1) of JJSO 2000, binds provincial and federal governments

11
to establish juvenile courts in each district; however, no juvenile courts have been

established across the country. Instead, provincial governments are tasked to hear the

trials of juvenile offenders in adult courts (Ramzan, 2014).

JJSO and CRC recommend the incarceration of juveniles in separate facilities

to assure their rehabilitation. Article 37(c) of the Convention on the Rights of the

Child (CRC) provides:

"Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and

respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner

which takes into account the needs of persons of his or her age. In

particular, every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from

adults unless it is considered in the child's best interest not to do so and

shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her family through

correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances"(Manco,

2015, p. 55).

Article 40 of the CRC provides;

"1. States Parties recognize the right of every child alleged as, accused

of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a

manner consistent with the promotion of the child's sense of dignity

and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights

and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the

child's age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration

and the child's assuming a constructive role in society" (Smith, 2013,

p. 368).

12
For the best interest of the child, the JJSO 2000, provides in article 11(b)

"Make an order directing the child offender to be sent to a Borstal

Institution until he attains the age of eighteen years or for the period of

imprisonment whichever is earlier" (Amnesty International, 2005, p. 16).

The JJSO 2000, recommends probation officers for children to ensure that they

may not imprisoned unnecessarily and the appointment of legal advisors to represent

these children in courts free of cost. Often probation officers and legal advisors do not

perform their duties, leaving most of the children to remain for long period of time in

adult jails. Lack of Borstal Institutions and probation arrangements has resulted in the

lengthy incarceration of juveniles. The rise of the child population in prison has also been

prompted by a lack of indulgence of some courts regarding rights of juveniles and a

reluctance to give them all the assistance under the JJSO, 2000. Requirements of the CRC

and the JJSO, 2000 with regard to the environment children in custody are very badly

implemented, if not ignored in Pakistan. SPARC reports in September 2004 that "one

would be hard pressed to identify any noticeable change in the conditions of juvenile

offenders" despite the introduction of the JJSO 2000, drawing the inference that

safeguards intended to protect children are regularly ignored (SPARC, 2006).

1.7 Statement of the Problem

In Pakistan, juvenile prisoners are suffering from numerous problems which

have crippled their psychological well-being, social standing and earning zeal as

productive members of the community. They are prone to different kinds of physical,

psychological, social and sexual violence. Though the JJSO was introduced by the

Government of Pakistan in 2000, mandating that the state is bound to establish

exclusive Juvenile Prisons (Borstal Institutions) and juvenile courts at the district

13
level, no practical step has been taken in this regard. This lack has adversely affected

the juvenile prisoners in different dimensions. Under the Ordinance, they are to be

educated and trained with different skills but unfortunately, they are undergoing a

critical situation of mental agony. In adult jails, juvenile inmates are undergoing

punishments and they have established connections with dangerous groups/gangs.

Prison is for the purpose of correction of criminal behavior of prisoners, but juvenile

inmates‘ behavior further deteriorates due to their established relations with the

gangsters. After release from jail, juvenile inmates emerge as professional delinquents

in the disguise of recidivists. The alarming situation is that they are vulnerable to

sexual exploitation at jails with adult inmates and many such cases have been reported

in this regard.

Juvenile inmates‘ socialization also stands affected at jails; they are not accepted

by the society because they are not well educated, nor are they given training about the

conventional value system and normative structure of society. The present study will

focus on identifying the multi-dimensional impacts of the un-conducive environment of

jail on the juvenile prisoners in selected jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

1.8 Significance of the Study

The present study is significant in that it depicts the concentration of the

government towards the subject issue and various flaws in implementation of JJSO,

2000. It will contribute to awareness among the community about the unsuitable

environment of jail for the juvenile prisoners where they are vulnerable to a number

of unwanted situations. The related stakeholders would be able to plan the best

possible solution by adopting appropriate measures for the rehabilitation of juvenile

prisoners such as counseling and guidance. It will also provide valuable information

14
on the issue to academia and researchers. It also put forward strategies that would

empower the juveniles in their rehabilitation. Furthermore, the findings and

recommendations of the study could be utilized for better policy formulation. It will

provide new insights for government and Non-Government Organization (NGOs) to

formulate policies to eradicate the issue under the study in a more realistic way.

1.9 Aims and Objectives of the Study

 To explore the socio-demographic conditions of the sampled juvenile prisoners in

the study units;

 To identify multiple factors promoting criminal tendencies of the juvenile prisoners

either undergoing diverse kinds of penalties or still being prosecuted in the courts;

 To ascertain various impacts of the unsuitable jail environment detrimental to the

personalities of juvenile prisoners;

 To seek the perception of the juvenile prisoners towards criminal activity;

 To find out the association between independent and dependent variables of the

study.

1.10 Research Questions

 Why Borstal Institutions do not exist and what vulnerabilities of sexual

harassment to juvenile inmates are there in the jails?

 What kind of interaction of juvenile prisoners takes place with adult criminals in

the jails which makes them recidivists after they are released?

 What problems are generated by the non-existence of juvenile courts which

promote the criminal tendency of the juvenile prisoners?

 How do juvenile prisoners perceive themselves after commission of crime?

 What impacts the incongruous environment of jail leave on the juvenile prisoners?

15
1.11 Conceptual Framework

Independent Variables Dependent Variable

(Jail Environment) (Impact on Juvenile Prisoners)

 Living Condition Well-being of Juveniles

 Attitude of Jail Staff  Social Marginalization
 Exclusive Prisons (Borstal  Recidivism
Institutions)  Psychological Well-being
 Delayed Justice Process  Sexual Violence
 Exclusive Courts  Health
 Relations‘ of Juveniles with Gangsters  Education

1.12 Humiliation of Juveniles in Correction Institutions of KP

Juveniles are brought to prison from their local environment for the purpose of

rehabilitation and reformation. Multiple aspects of their well-being are affected in the

new environment of jails i.e. psychological problems, sexual exploitation, health

issues, recidivism, social marginalization and education problems. These new

challenges either make juvenile prisoners mentally retarded or they get prey to such

environment and may become hardened criminals. Moreover, the unconducive

environment of jail affects the health and personality of juveniles which is more likely

to make problems to the future life of juveniles and hence it would be difficult for

them to adjust themselves with their environment after their release.

1.13 Limitations of the Study

The researcher attempted to overcome various limitations encountered in this

project. Some of these limitations are stated below:

 Due to limited time and resources, only 5 jails were taken as a sample for this

study.

16
  There was limited time to complete data collection from various

stakeholders.

 Consents from legal counsels, probation officers and jail staff were one of the

difficult tasks, where some of these stakeholders in the juvenile justice

system hesitated in giving data. However, they agreed later to provide

information after frequent visits to their offices.

 Some of the juveniles didn‘t understand Pashto or Urdu because they were

Hindko speakers, so data from them was taken with the help of translator.

1.14 Future Research Prospect in the Study Area

 As the left behind families of juvenile inmates was not included in this study,

so the researchers can evaluate the impact of jail environment on the families

of juveniles.

 Further studies can be done on the female juvenile prisoners and adult female

prisoners as they were out of the scope of the current study.

 Comparative studies could be conducted on prison environment with reference

to borstal institutions.

 Juvenile prisoners who are incarcerated in the charge of terrorism can be

studied in future.

1.15 Organization of the Study

This study is comprised of five chapters. The first chapter of the study is about

the introduction of the study. In introduction chapter, a brief description of the study

was given. This chapter contains a thorough explanation of the incongruous jail

environment. This chapter also contains a statement of the problem, significance of

17
the study, aims and objectives of the study, research questions, conceptual framework

and limitations of the study.

The second chapter of the study reflects the literature review. It is divided into

two parts. Part-I of the literature is concerned with the previous review of literature on

the topic. In this part, the researcher adopted a strategy to consult previous literature

on the topic at international, regional and at national level. This part covers the

previous literature on independent variables under the headings of living conditions,

attitude of jail staff, exclusive prisons (Borstal Institutions), delayed justice process,

lack of exclusive courts and relations with gangsters. Review of previous literature on

dependent variable contains well-being of juveniles with sub variables, including

social marginalization, recidivism, psychological well-being, sexual violence, health

and education. Review of literature under these headings provides a clear

understanding to the researcher in the formulation of tools for data collection and

study objectives. Part-II of the literature review is related to the theoretical framework

of the study that strengthens the study on theoretical ground.

The third chapter of the study is the research methodology. In this chapter, a

brief description of the study procedure has been given. It includes the nature of the

study, the universe of the study, sample size, sample technique and procedures, tools

of data collection in both qualitative and quantitative methods, data analysis and

ethical consideration.

Chapter four considers the results and discussions of the study. Quantitative

data was analyzed by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and

qualitative data was analyzed by transcribing the study themes. At the end of this

chapter the quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed through concurrent

18
triangulation strategy of mixed methods research. According to the mixed methods

approach, the quantitative and qualitative data findings were given separately first and

then compared for the sake of convergence based on consonant and inconsonant

results with justification of resolving dissonance.

The last chapter, which is chapter five, contains the summary, conclusion and

recommendations. This chapter entails summary in concrete form followed by

compact conclusion and recommendations. At the end, there has been given annexure

which includes references cited in the study and different tools of data collection of

quantitative and qualitative methods.

19
Chapter - II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews available previous literature related to the topic of

―Impact of incongruous jail environment on the juvenile prisoners in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa jails‖. This chapter provides a clear understanding of the issue at the

global, regional, national and local level. It further outlines the literature under the

headings of living condition, attitude of the jail staff, the Borstal Institutions for

Juveniles, delayed justice system, lack of exclusive juvenile courts, relation with

gangsters, social marginalization, recidivism, psychological well-being, sexual

violence, health and education regarding juvenile prisoners. The researcher has

studied a number of secondary data sources related to the issue of different aspects of

jail environment and its impact on juvenile prisoners and incorporated such studies in

the literature review chapter. The previous studies and other related reading materials

helped the researcher in outlining the research design of the present study.

2.1 Living Condition at Prisons

Living conditions of the jail environment for inmates play an important role in

their rehabilitation. When living condition of prison is clean and provide all the basic

facilities to inmates like bed, blanket, mattress, clean drinking water, toilet, education

and health etc. then the inmates rehabilitate quickly. According to Australia‘s last

Universal Periodic analysis, the conditions in Australian prisons have deteriorated;

poor conditions, substandard healthcare and overcrowding are reported. Australia is

yet to approve the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other

Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) and to provide

independent prisons (Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2014).

20
2.1.1 Young People in Prisons

Half of the young people in some countries detention are in pre-trial detention

(Richards, 2011). The high rate of pre-trial detention shows that bail systems are

either not specific for youth only or are being used for disciplinary purposes. Pre-trial

detention centers should only be used for the protection of the community from

further crimes and to guard the reliability of the trial process. This is particularly

important because the detention centers negatively impact adults and are worse for

young people who are a more vulnerable population (New South Wales Law Reform

Commission, 2012).

2.1.2 Prison Over-crowding

Over-crowding is one of the biggest problems for prison administrators all

over the world. Over-crowding in prison occurs when there is an increase in the

number of prisoners compared to the capacity of the prison and the ability of its

infrastructure to keep up with this growth. Many prisoners are being placed in

demountable shipping containers, use as cells and are sleeping on mattresses on the

floor (Dunlop, 2014). Over-crowding hampers education and rehabilitation in prisons.

Due to harsh living conditions, a large number of prisoners are at a higher risk of

experiencing health related problems (Ombudsman, 2014). Over-crowding also

impacts pre-trial detention conditions—prisoners often have difficulty being able to

communicate with their lawyers properly. It is necessary to have prisons operating

according to rules and to reduce the rate of imprisonment. Ways to reduce the rate of

imprisonment include the execution of non-custodial sentencing options, intervention

strategies, and helping prisoners in the development of personality by education, and

with computers skills and online services. Though there is an anomalous increase in

the number of inmates, the government has failed to build new prisons in order to

accommodate these prisoners (Australia Human Rights Score Card, 2015).

21
 In many countries, overcrowding is the key issue which causes problems such

as corrupt and untrained law enforcement officials, inefficient justice systems, and

mismanaged and low paid prison staff. For example, in Central America prisons are

under the supervision of the local and national police force or military organizations,

which have a lack of experience in prison management and operation. Due to

mismanagement, the supervisors of some corrections systems are not competent,

which results in a deficiency in standard operation procedures; they may be incapable

of implementing the procedures and may be less likely to properly lead staff

treatment, training, and development. Overcrowding and consequent poor hygiene is

also one of the main problems in Serbia where 11,000 prisoners are placed in a prison

which has the capacity of only 6,500. The physical mistreatment of prisoners in police

custody as well as by prison guards are reported in some locations of Serbia. In Chad,

Amnesty International described poor, inhuman, cruel and degrading treatment

conditions. Amnesty International has also reported that because regional detention

centers had a very limited budget for food, they provided limited meals for inmates.

Most Chadian prisoner guards do not receive a regular salary, so they sometimes

release prisoners who compensate them (U.S. Department of State, 2013).

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2012) analyzed

the sensitive and prevalent challenges produced due to overcrowding in prisons

around the globe that causes serious problems. Overcrowded prisons are mostly

violent and difficult to administrate and control. In South Sudan, due to limited

resources, judicial capacity and lack of prison services overcrowded prisoners

experience harsh and threatening conditions which often contribute to disease and

death.

22
 The U.S. Department of State (2013) reports further reveal that even for

developed countries in Western Europe (e.g., Italy, Ireland, Belgium and France)

which have comparatively greater resources, overcrowding in prisons is a challenging

problem. An example of one of the worst conditions of overcrowding occurred in the

prisons in Italy where in 2012, 66,529 inmates were placed in 206 prisons designed

for 47,048 people. According the UNODC 2012, prison overcrowding is the most

worrying emergency facing the Italian prison system.

2.1.3 Mistreatment towards Prisoners

According to Open Society Foundation (2011), mistreatment at the hands of

prison officials leaves prisoners psychologically, sexually and physically disturbed. In

some cases, these abuses happen during pre-trial detention and at police stations.

Following proper procedure during pre-trial detention practices can prevent

mistreatment of prisoners in custody. Protective measures include the access to legal

advocates and family members.

In many countries, the intentional exploitation of prisoners has been a fixed

practice for many years and creates obstacles for those who want to improve

conditions for prisoners. The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission

(AIHRC) found probable and reliable proof that more than half of the 635 prisoners

interviewed, experienced torture and mistreatment in various correctional facilities of

the Afghan Nation. In Iraq, national and international NGOs reported general methods

of torture and ill-treatment which involved suffocation, suspension from the ceiling,

beatings, stress positions, sexual assault, removal of finger nails, broken fingers,

burning, electric shocks, denial of medical treatment, over extending the spine, and

death threats. In Pakistan, human rights organizations reported that police sometimes

23
miserably and badly treated those in lock-up with different methods which involved

hanging upside down, beating the soles of feet, burning with cigarettes, rebuff of food

or sleep, electric shock, beating with batons and whips, and prolonged isolation (Open

Society Foundation, 2011). The European Committee called for the avoidance of

torture and inhuman treatment of prisoners (EPR, 2006)

In some developing countries, where police lack resources, capacity or

experience informally examining illegal conduct, they may use traditional forms of

punishment. In Cambodia, NGOs reported the torture of about 100 detainees in 2012,

in the majority cases while in police custody; it was not unusual for police to torture

people under arrest until they admit to a crime. In 2012, the overall treatment of

prisoners improved [in Burma?] as compared to the early condition of human rights

violation. Security forces regularly apply harsh techniques of investigation to

detainees to force them to admit to an offence (Open Society Foundation, 2011).

Clean water is necessary for survival of human life. Accessibility is especially

important in jails where large numbers of people are living together. Access to clean

water is not only important for personal cleanliness, but also can prevent disease from

spreading. In India most, large prisons are facing a problem accessing clean water.

However, compared to large prison there is negligible problem of clean water in small

prison in the state, such as Hassan, Bijapur, Shimoga, Gulburga, and Raichur jails

operational without water supply. Officially it is defined that problems are removed

from these small prisons but still these prisons are facing shortage of water and other

hygienic conditions. Also, there is no sufficient clean water for drinking, bathing and

for toilet use. Due to non-availability of water on regular basis prisons become very

dirty. Since early 2007, when Larson and Toubro cut off the water supply to Gulbarga

Central Prison, prisoners have suffered from a water shortage (Karnam, 2007-08).

24
 The district administrative setup did not take any preventive actions to control

the condition, which is another indication of the reality that jails are not a main

concern. Likewise, in Bijapur Central Jail there is no proper system to supply water

for toilets and bathing; with the result that toilets near the kitchens and in the barracks

are disgusting. In Bidar, Gadag, Madikeri, and Sagar jails the water problem in

summer is dire. While Gadag jail, getting least supply of drinking water (Karnam,

2007-08).

According to the United Nations Charter, Standard Minimum Rules for the

Treatment of Prisoners (SMR) a sleeping room should be provided to each and every

prisoner in any given correctional facility. The United Nations also suggests that even

when exceptional reasons, such as temporary overloading, make an exception to this

rule essential; it is not desirable to enclose two inmates in one sleeping room

(Rodriguez, 2007).

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) (2012) conducted a

research study which showed that prisoners should normally sleeping during the night

in individual cells, apart from them it depends upon the will of prisoners to share their

sleeping room with another prisoner.

According to the United Nations, the clean water in prisons must be sufficient

to allow each inmate to fulfill the needs of nature in a hygienic and civilized way. The

Council of Europe also stressed the importance of clean water for prisoners (European

Prison Rules [EPR], 2006).

According to the ICRC there should be a minimum of one toilet per 25

prisoners available 24 hours near or in the cell. The ICRC also recommends that

enough time shall be given to each prisoner in order to ease frequent access to the

25
toilet. Furthermore, ICRC suggests that each cell should be out fitted with at least one

toilet. Although there are no International rules for running water in the jails, ICRC

suggest that water points should be established in prison that prisoners may easily

access for hygiene purposes, hydration and sanitation (ICRC, 2012).

2.1.4 Ventilation in the Facility

For proper lighting and fresh air in prisons, windows are essential. The

international rules are more interested in the size and position of the windows through

which the prisoner can view the outside from their cell. According to the United

Nations, windows must be constructed so that the fresh air can easily enter and should

provide enough light, so prisoners can work and read easily in their cells (EPR, 2006).

ICRC also recommends explicit technical specifications for the windows at jail. An

optimal design would let fresh air enter the cell from outside and allow prisoners can

see the outer part of the prison from their cells (Nembrini, 2013).

2.2 Attitude of Jail Staff

The function of NGOs in minimizing the consequences of juvenile

delinquency is acknowledged by the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the

Administration of Juvenile Justice (The Beijing Rules) as Genuine consideration

might be given to positive measures that include the full usage of every single

conceivable asset, including the family, volunteers and other group gatherings, and

also schools and other· group establishments, to promote the welfare of the

adolescent, with a view to lessening the requirement for mediation under the law, and

of viably, reasonably and others consciously managing the adolescent in struggle with

the law (The United Nations, 1986).

26
 According to Article 10 of The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) signatories are required to

make sure that, instruction and data with respect to the preclusion against torment are

completely incorporated into the preparation of law implementation staff, common or

military, restorative work force, open authorities and different people who might be

engaged with the guardianship, cross examination or treatment of any individual

subjected to any type of capture or detainment. Prohibition against torture of prisoners

is also significant in all conventions and the directions also issued on the duties and

functions of the offices (The United Nations, 1984).

The Pakistani civilian government is bound to follow the rules designed by

UNCAT, therefore those reporting on Pakistan‘s agreement with the UNCAT should

also examine that military‘s role, since they have also engaged in illegal custody and

inhuman treatment.

After a long struggle in the early 1900s, the jail officials started using

treatment approaches instead of dehumanizing prisoners and perpetuating brutal jail

conditions. The jail officers had been responsible for security of prisoners and have to

apply practically disciplinary approaches for prisoners in jails (Gatotoh, Omulema &

Nassiuma, 2011).

For the first time in 1956, the job of aguard in United States was clearly

defined; it is the responsibility of guard to control the internal order of jail. In fact, the

term ―guard‖ is only used for custodial identity; the change in role of the correctional

officer reflects the introduction of the rehabilitative approach in the field of

corrections facility (Farkas, 1995).

27
 In the middle of 1970s the concept of punishment of prisoners at jail shifted to

rehabilitation of the prisoners, but due to some problems facing by the jail staff they

rejected the rehabilitation approach in prisons, and once again they followed the in-

humanitarian practice of punishment in the prison (Lipton, Martinson & Wilks, 1975).

In the 1970s many researchers found that the punishment approach had a

negative effect on the juvenile prisoners in the jails. Due to this, the recidivism rate

increased in prisons where they punished the prisoners. So, after that, they again

converted their approach to the rehabilitation process (Gendreau, Little & Goggin,

1996).

Research has shown that most jails in America, Europe and in Asia are quickly

reforming the policy of their jails so as to offer prisoner treatment services,

rehabilitation and correctional counseling as opposed to punitive sentences

(Paboojian, Raymond & Teske, 1997). Kolind (2010) noted that as the availability of

drugs at jail increased over the last 15 years, the diversity and the volume in the usage

of these drugs also increased at jails. The jail staffs do not want prisoners to sleep and

live a relaxed life at jail. Due to the proliferation of drugs in jails, problems occur in

the different approaches of punishment and rehabilitation.

According to Moon and Maxwell (2004), South Korea recently worked to

change the punishment approach to a rehabilitation process. Importance is now being

placed on counseling, treatment programs, and on education. And the roles of the jail

staff are also changed from a custodial role to a human service role and mostly the

officers of the jail are expected to treat the prisoners through rehabilitation (Murray,

2009). The attitude of the jail staff also changed in Africa from punishment to a

rehabilitation process and they focus on how the jail staff deals with prisoners. Also,

28
the correctional facilities of rehabilitation and counseling have been developed in

Africa (Gatotoh et al., 2011). Gatotoh et al. (2011) found that most officers in the jails

prefer counseling over punishment. Indeed, most people believe that counseling is far

better than punishment to rehabilitate the prisoners. The result of this is a renewed

sense of the importance of training jail staff in correctional counseling. According to

Lariviere (2001), it is important that policy makers and social scientists give proper

attention to correctional officers. Correctional officers are responsible for the security;

order of institution and of peace in the jails.

Among prisoner characteristics, gender, age and education have been

examined for correctional orientation. Some studies mostly examined educated

prisoners and the jail staff has no significant relationship between them (Farkas, 1999;

Jurik & Musheno, 1996). But according to some other studies the relationship of the

jail staff with educated prisoners is very supportive, cooperative and as a result the

rehabilitation process of these educated prisoners becomes very easy (Poole & Regoli,

1980; Lariviere, 2001).

Melvin, Gramling and Gardner (1985) explain the importance of a prisoners‘

attitude towards their fellow prisoners. If the attitudes of prisoners are friendly, then

the rehabilitation of prisoners will be positive. Positive attitudes will also promote

self-esteem among prisoners, because the attitude of the prisoners influences the jail

officers and the process of rehabilitation. The rehabilitation of prisoners will be

successful when the attitude of common people after the release of prisoners is

positive.

Efforts should be made to develop a juvenile justice system in Asia and

priority should be given to legislation and training programs other than reformatory

29
steps. The expansion of new and modern institutions, such as Borstal Institutions,

juvenile courts, specialized police units investigating juvenile offenders, and priority

given to children‘s rights for those who become offenders. Developing a juvenile

justice system in order to provide speedy justice to juveniles it will also protect the

rights of children. This system should have qualified staff, dedicated professionals

and be adequately resourced; the authorities should allow this system to effectively

respect the rights of the childin order to reduce juvenile reoffending and to protect the

rights of society. A system which has no link with other systems in society, such as

social welfare and education of the society does not benefit juvenile offenders, nor

does a system that cannot ensure the liability of people who not perform their duties

(Melvin et al., 1985).

The breakdown of the rules and law of the prison system is due to the corrupt

and dysfunctional officers of the prison. The poorly managed, under staffed and over

populated jails become a fertile breeding place for militancy and criminality due to

these corrupt officers of the system, and the prisoners are likely to return to crimes

instead of rehabilitation (International Crises Group, 2011).

Due to lack of funding and other government aid, prisoners at jail face severe

health problem due to lack of medical facilities. The living environments for inmates

are terrible, with insufficient grants ensuring the absence of medical facilities.

Diseases such as AIDS/HIV spread due to a lack of proper treatment for infectious

diseases. The shortage of properly qualified, disciplined jail staff has also increased

the crime rate, violence and sexual abuse in jails. Lack of space at jail also makes it

difficult to separate adult and juvenile inmates. Furthermore, the availability of

mobile phones also increased the ratio of crimes including kidnappings. The report

30
recommends protecting the rights of inmates and positive reforms to update the jail

management. It also identifies the need to take steps to improve the jail condition and

provide speedy justice for offenders (International Crises Group, 2011).

In Pakistani jails the condition of prisoners is very poor, and they face a

number of problems such as poor living conditions, dangerous diseases, food

problems, bullying, torture, and corruption (HRCP, 2014).

The Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) has taken some new steps for

children who are involved in unlawful activity and who are arrested by the police. The

iron or chain shall not be put in their hands unless the child tries to flee from

detention. The head of the police station should inform the child‘s guardian and

probation officer as soon as possible and the arrested child shall be produced in front

of a magistrate within twenty-four hours (UNICEF, 2006). The reason for the

mandate that arrested children should be produced in front of a magistrate within

twenty-four hours is due to a report which found that the police sexually exploit the

children. The report found that police reportedly engaged in false arrests of children

and took bribe from their families. The children of the wealthy families were released

after their families paid bribes to the police, but the children from poor families

reported that police forced them and beat them to confess guilt. In many cases police

released children without producing them before a magistrate (UNICEF, 2006).

According to JJSO 2000, a child of non-bailable offence should be brought to

exclusive court within twenty-four hours (SPARC, 2000).

In violation of JJSO children are arrested illegally and are jailed for days for

small offences, in adult jails without adequate facilities. They meet with dangerous

criminals at jails like terrorists, jihadis, and militants. When they released from jails

31
they become recidivist and become professional criminals. Due to unavailability of

juvenile jails it becomes very difficult to isolate juveniles from adult criminals

(International Crises Group, 2011).

Provincial and Federal governments are trying to construct more jails and

barracks, but this strategy is not beneficial because of some flaws in the system.

Prisoners are increase in gat jails because of non-bailable petty crime offenses. The

current government has taken some steps to take bail from courts for petty crimes

offenders, but the jail population could be reduced if courts applied this step regularly.

There is also shortage of parole and probation officers and there are no proper

programs for rehabilitation of the released prisoners. Federal and provincial

governments should improve police and judicial and provincial government should

invest in the establishment of a probation regime, and make alternatives for small

crimes, such as community service, community confinement, fines, drug treatment,

and mental health. And also strong action should be taken against jail staff and police

who take bribes from prisoners (International Crises Group, 2011).

According to the penal code, there should be no torture of the prisoners in the

custody and in courts. But torture in custody of jails and in police stations is present

all over Pakistan. Police do not use modern investigation techniques in Pakistan; the

only way they know how to investigate a crime is to torture the accused until they

receive a confession. The government must take some positive steps and invest in

resources that allow training in modern investigation procedures so that police

officials may not torture the accused (HRCP, 2014).

According to Hassan (2014), in the Prisons Act (1894), prisoners should be

classified on the basis of their age, sex and health. The common criminals, terrorists

32
and political convicts should be kept separate in the jails. During classification, the

financial status, crime type and education of the prisoners should be taken into

consideration. A survey conducted by the Legal Aid Office (LAO) found that

convicted prisoners, juvenile prisoners, prisoners under trial and the most dangerous

criminals all are mixed in the jails. They visited 17 jails and out of them in 5 different

jails, they found that the juveniles are housed with other prisoners. One of the

prisoners said the LAO that whatever you want in the jails like alcohol, women and

drugs the jail police will provide when you have money. Furthermore, he said that

when a juvenile is poor and has no political association, the jail staff sexually harasses

that prisoner (Hassan, 2014). Children with high profile families like political leaders

are allowed all facilities like homemade food, TV, and mobile phones (Malik &

Shirazi, 2010).

According to HRCP (2014), 72 prisoners died at jails in 2014 and about 47

were injured in accidents at jails. 50 deaths were confirmed as due to illness and 3

died due to custodial torture. Heart failure is a major cause of deaths at jails and often

post-mortem reports were rarely made by the police. When policemen were found

guilty, they were not punished for the death of the prisoner.

Sana (2007) reported, the instance of Zeeshan Budd is a staunch indication of

the sort of misuse looked by detainees in confinement. Zeeshan, a 17-year-old, was

gotten on the night of January 17, 2008, in the locale of Shah Lateef Town in Punjab.

He was not educated of the charges against him, his family was not said of his capture

that night, and he was neither sent to a remand home nor designated a probation

office, which is required under Pakistan's JJSO. Rather, he was stripped at the police

headquarters, beaten and examined, amid which time three officers assaulted him. A

video of the assault was recorded on an officer's cell phone. Zeeshan‘s grandmother

33
paid Rs.5, 000, to the officers who demanded a bribe to release him. After receiving

the money officers then kept the boy in detention and sent him to court. JJSO, 2000

was violated by these officers who kept children in the same cells with adults. The

juvenile inmates were then exploited by the elder prisoners sexually and they become

sexual abusers. According to the JJSO 2000, police should inform the family and

probation officer at the time of arrest and bring the accused person before magistrate

within 24 hours.

A heavy bribe is often demanded from the prisoners to escort them to court for

their hearings. And if prisoners refused to give something to the jail officers, they beat

the prisoners badly. In Lahore Central jail, a superintendent beat a prisoner badly and

fractured his leg. In petitioned time the prisoner reported his abuse at the hands of the

superintendent and further said that jail officers beat the prisoners very harshly when

prisoners failed in their demands. Later the prisoner forgives the official involved in

this (HRCP, 2014).

The JJSO, 2000 is a branch of the criminal justice system (CJS). The

difference between the CJS and the JJSO is that in JJSO, 2000 severe kind of

punishment is restricted to adults while rehabilitation is the main goal for juveniles.

According to the JJSO, when the juvenile offenders are taken to the courts, before

awarding sentence to offenders, the judge should inquire about the background of the

juvenile offender. The background of the adults is not taken into account regardless of

their crimes. Juveniles are put in bad conditions at jails, they are also put with adults‘

criminals and thus abused. Severe sentences continue to be given to juveniles even

after the introduction of JJSO in 2000. There is harrowing situation of juveniles in

detention centers; they are sexually abused, they report serious ill treatment, and they

are tortured by the officers (Malik & Shirazi, 2010).

34
2.3 Juvenile Jails (Borstal Institutions) for Juveniles

Juveniles comprise a small percentage of the total prisoners of the United

States. They were less than 1 percent of the total prison population in the mid-1980s,

but from 1985 they increased to 2 percent of the prisoners in the U.S. Between 1985

and 1997, in the U.S the number of juvenile offenders doubled from 3,400 in 1985 to

7,400 in 1997 (Wordes & Jones, 1998). It is essential to consider that the court data

do not account for the number of children in custody, but just the number of cases.

According to the one-day census of the imprisonment centers it is observed that from

the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s the detention rate of the juveniles increased by 68

percent (Wordes & Jones, 1998).

Juvenile judges and intake workers are allowed to use discretion when

deciding whether to take a child in custody. Some studies found that incarceration

rates diverse in percentage to the accessibility of imprisonment conveniences (Kramer

& Steffensmeier, 1977; Lerman, 1977; Pawlak, 1977).

Jail life can be destructive to adolescents and juvenile‘s lives. Jail life

separates them from their friends, families and disturbs their schooling. Except for

this some jails have many types of services they provide to the juveniles at jails such

as care of their mental health, physical health, recreational facilities and educational

facilities provided by some jails, and the facilities that vary from jail to jail.

Furthermore, due to overcrowding some jails are unable to provide facilities to the

juveniles (Smith, 1998). Overcrowding in jails has been found to be related with

increased disputes between staff and juveniles and has caused severe injuries to

minors. The average duration of residence in juvenile detention facilities is 15 days,

but some youth may stay just for few days, whereas some youngsters are housed in

juvenile detention for longer periods (Wordes & Jones, 1998).

35
 Land et al. (1998) consider some alternatives to jail application. The

applications differ from place to place, but the following factors consistently emerged:

interviews and screening of juveniles eligible for admission, supervision and

monitoring, rules for curfew, acquaintances in weekends, confirmation of obedience

at school and at home, addition of helpful society resources, and quick position into

detention. Rust (1999) stated that the Annie E. Casey Foundation started a Juvenile

Detention Alternatives program in 1992. Five different urban jurisdictions including

New York City, Cook County (Chicago), Illinois, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin,

Multnomah County (Portland), Oregonand Sacramento County, California were

awarded funds to start programs to eradicate the unsuitable use of custody, decrease

the number of delinquents who commit new crimes or fail to appear for court, and to

avoid developing new detention centers and beds for juveniles in favor of improving

expedited procedures to allay overloading in secure detention facilities. The ultimate

assessment of the programs in Portland, Sacramento and Chicago by the National

Council on Crime and Delinquency, was in 2000.

In adjudicatory hearings, the cases of juveniles are scheduled in juvenile court.

After the court hearing, the judge declares the result of the hearing in which the

adjudicationis determined. Minor offenders may be sent to treatment such as

community service. But the most common adjudication is probation; more than half

of the cases were placed on probation in 1996 (Stahl et al., 1999).

There are four types of jails in each province of Pakistan, which include

special jails, central jails, district jails and sub jails. Every division of the province has

a central jail, which holds about 1,000 prisoners, irrespective of the duration of

punishment. Moreover, provincial governments have the authority to upgrade any

36
district jail as a central jail (Auolakh & Khan, 2003). Special jails include Borstal

Institutions, juvenile training centers, open jails and women‘s prisons. Provincial

governments can build jails at anytime, anywhere they want and also can announce

any jail as a special jail. Except for special jails or central jails, all jails are designated

as district jails. District jails are the jails that accommodate prisoners up to 5 years of

jails and those prisoners whose jails up to one-year and sub prisons are those prisons,

where prisoners may be in custody on remand (Auolakh & Khan, 2003).

The Juvenile Justice System (JJS) recognizes the rights of juvenile offenders

under 18 years of age. When police arrest juveniles, they cannot be treated as

criminals. Firstly, they must be presented to the juvenile court within 24 hours and

their parents or guardian should be informed. They must be held in juvenile facilities

and should not be kept with adult prisoners in the jail. This offender should be

exercised under the juvenile justice system ordinance (JJSO) 2000 (Malik & Shirazi,

2010). Improvement, maintenance and establishment of jails are the responsibility of

Provincial governments (Akbar & Bhutta, 2012).

Malik and Shirazi (2010) stated that the concept of Certified Schools, Borstal

Institutions and Reformatory Schools has not been accomplished throughout Pakistan

despite the existence of law relating to them. There are Certified Schools and

Industrial Schools in Hyderabad and in Karachi, Borstal Institutions in Bahawalpur

and Faisalabad and Reformatory Schools for juvenile inmates in the whole of

Pakistan. For female juvenile prisoners, there is no exclusive jail or school, thus

female inmates are kept in same jails with adult women inmates. There are just four

juvenile prisons in Pakistan, due to which juveniles are kept in same jails with adult

criminals (Dawn, 2012).

37
 As of December 2007, in Pakistan there were more than ninety (90) jails. Out

of these 90 jails 41 were built by the British. There were 22 jails in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa (KP), 22 in Sindh and 32 in Punjab and the remaining jails in

Balochistan (Malik & Shirazi, 2010).

All jails of Pakistan have more inmates than they can handle. The factors

involving in this issue include overcrowding, failure tohear of prisoner‘s cases on

time, lack of legal aid for those who are poor, deficiency of trained public prosecutors

and refusal to give bail to prisoners who commit minor offences (International Crisis

Group, 2011).

In Pakistan the Punjab province has more than 53,000 prisoners in jails with a

capacity of 21,527 inmates. There are 13,282 prisoners in Sindh jails prepared to

house 10,450 prisoners. In KP there are 8,450 inmates in a place built to hold 8,000

inmates. In Balochistan jails the prisoners‘ population is 2,643 whereas the jail

capacity is only 2,481 inmates (International Crises Group, 2011).

There are more than 150 juvenile prisoners in 4 jails in Punjab who are not

supported by schools from the government side. In the slogan of ―Parha Likha

Punjab‖ (educated Punjab) the juvenile prisoners are not included. In places in Punjab

like Muzaffargarh, Rajanpur and Sargodha, juveniles are placed in the dirtiest place of

the jails and in this respect, Sargodha is the worst. Furthermore, jail authorities argue

that there are no funds to build separate cells for the juvenile prisoners (Aziz & Khan,

2008).

There are more than 21,000 prisoners in Sindh jails, which have a capacity of

about 12,000. Sindh Chief Minister Qaim Ali Shah was leading a meeting on prison

reforms in light of the Supreme Court orders and at the conclusion of the federal

38
ombudsman offices at the Chief Minister House said, ―This overcrowding is the root

cause of several other problems. The objective of turning jails into rehabilitation

centers cannot be achieved under the present living conditions of prisoners, thus

effective measures are the need of the hour‖ (The Express Tribune, 2016).

In Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, although the capacity of prisoners was 8,091 in a

total of 22 prisons, in judicial lockups there are 9,433 prisoners. The total

accommodation of prisoners in Peshawar central jail is 850 but they kept 2,227

prisoners which are against the authorized accommodation. In Central Jail Haripur the

present prisoners‘ number 1892 against the authorized capacity of the jail, which is

1597 prisoners. The authorized capacity of Swabi jail is 70 but the current number of

prisoners is 425. Similarly, in the case of Lakki Marwat district jail, the

accommodation capacity is 99 but presently, 227 prisoners are present there. The

district jails in Abbottabad and Swat are under construction, while expansion of Dera

Ismail Khan and Peshawar prisons are in progress (Dawn, 2015).

2.4 Delayed Justice

In the 19th century, children who committed any crime or were involved in any

unlawful act were treated like adult prisoners. But in the start of the 20th century, 32

states established juvenile courts. The concept of punishment was prioritized for any

offence but in the 20th century after the establishment of juvenile courts, the concept

of punishment changed to rehabilitation in order to make juvenile offenders

productive citizens. By 1950, most juvenile offenders were tried in juvenile courts in

the US but if the court wanted to transfer any case to the criminal court, the judge had

the right to do so (Coley & Barton, 2006).

39
 The juvenile justice system in the US adopted problem solving methods rather

than punishing juveniles but dealt with every case individually. This approach

sometimes becomes problematic because the behavior of human beings cannot be

changed abruptly and needs some time to mould their behavior. So, in contradiction,

attempts to reform juveniles may lead to more crimes rather than their integration of

juveniles. Delays in the justice process have negative impacts not only on juveniles

but on their families as well (National Institute of Justice, 2014).

There are thousands of defendants in India who are waiting for their trial while

living an incarcerated life in detention. About 70 percent of the total incarcerated

population is living in detention while awaiting court sentencing. This phenomenon

often leads to longer sentences then their actual sentence. Globally, there are

approximately 33 lacks accused living incarcerated lives on any day. In India, people

have recognized that this is a critical issue which needs some attention. People from

different government services and officials, lawyer, judges and civil society activists

have united for this cause and they want major reforms to tackle this issue

(Schonteich, 2014; Krishnan & Kumar, 2011).

In Pakistan, there are more than 1.35 million cases pending. This situation of

delaying of justice process is very bad in all courts of the country. The Lahore High

Court tops the number of pending cases as it has 129809 cases pending. The Sindh

High Courts come in second, where the numbers drop to 39487, while Peshawar High

Courts are third on the listin which pending cases are 18285. Similarly, other Supreme

Court and Federal Shariat courts and other courts of the country have also a great

number of pending cases. These figures drop from the total pending cases in 2009,

June 1st after the new judicial policy was imposed (Malik & Shirazi, 2010).

40
 In Pakistan, civil cases normally take 5 to 10 years to solve whereas criminal

cases also take more than 5 years. Some of the reasons behind delays in the justice

process in Pakistan are that the case load on prosecutors and judges increases day by

day and the accused often are not brought to courts on time (International Crisis

Group, 2011).

Government law commissions recommended increasing the number of courts,

judicial and other facilities. It is important to point out the flaws in CJS, especially in

prosecution and investigation, which produce a 10 percent conviction rate which is

very low; however, the majority of prisoners are living at jails on remand and their

cases are left unheard. Due to these problems in the system, the majority of people

donot have proper access to legal defense. Lacking money and without political

connections, prisoners under trial remain at jails on remand for months, even years

(International Crisis Group, 2011).

The committee directed the chief justices of the high court to supervise the

district judiciary through member inspection teams (MITs). In view of some factors

hindering the justice including defer the inquiry and delays in hearings for inmates

under trial, the committee also called a monthly meeting of member inspection teams,

non-sub mission of challans, reclamation, probation and secretaries to get a better idea

of the results of their institutions. ―A meeting of Law and Justice Commission of

Pakistan headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry stressed the need for

legislation of new laws on issues relating to public importance and bringing the

existing ones into accord with the changing needs of society‖ (Rehman, 2011).

When a case begins, the guarding and the transporting of prisoners should be

the responsibility of the police to bring them to courts on trial dates. Police have not

41
been cooperating with jail officials; furthermore, problems are created by scarce

resources for jail related duties. Aside from these problems, another issue of delayed

justice is the corruption of the police or jail staff demanding bribes from prisoners for

access to a judge (International Crisis Group, 2011).

In May 2011, the National Judicial Policy Making Committee (NJPMC),

headed by Supreme Court chief justice, admitted that ―faulty and half-hearted

investigations had contributed to a drop in the conviction rate. The NJPMC also

observed, the issues in regards to non-accommodation of challans, blemished

examinations, non-creation of under-trial detainees in the court blocks the allotment

of equity (Sigamony, 2011). Moreover, the ex-chief justice of the Lahore High Court

said that extreme action is necessary to clean up the CJS, but both the judiciary and

government have not taken positive steps (Sigamony, 2011).

According to human rights activists, Pakistan‘s congested jails owe greatly to

the lack of effective and appropriate system of official advisors for inmates who do

not know about their legal rights and cannot afford the fines or post bail money.

People arrested for petty crimes wait for their trials without a legal advisor. There are

only a small number of trained advisors to represent or support the accused person

from police custody to courts (International Crisis Group, 2011).

In January 2010, the National Assembly passed the Public Defender and Legal

Aid Office Act (PDLAOA), 2009, the aim of this act is to encourage justice in

Pakistan by providing free legal assistance, and to protect the rights of individuals.

The government, through the Chief Public Defender and his associates will represent

any deprived individual in trials. This power also extends to any court of law

(PDLAOA, 2009).

42
 Under PDLAOA the chief public prosecutor allocates duties to subordinates,

serves a fixed three-year term, keeps the government up to date about all activities

and results and monitors and evaluates their work. A district legal prosecutor, a

lawyer with minimum ten years practice in a High Court who is selected for each

district, has in addition to support the additional chief legal prosecutor and chief legal

prosecutor, the authority to go to jails and help the needy prisoners (PDLAOA, 2009).

According to Beijing Rules, when a juvenile is detained, the parents must be

contacted immediately. Furthermore, any association with law enforcement agencies

and a detained child must be dealt with according to the legal status of the child,

promote their welfare and protect him from harm. Particularly, police should not use

any harsh and abusive language and should not beat the juveniles. Police officers who

regularly deal with juveniles must be well trained and skilled. In big cities, exclusive

police units should be formed to deal juveniles in a proper way (UNICEF, 2006).

The Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) should give protection to those

juveniles who are in conflict with the law and who commit a crime at the age of less

than 18 years. Furthermore, the Ordinance does not yet apply to the PATA or the

FATA which states that any kind of act shall not apply to these tribal areas without

the directives of the president of Pakistan. Under the penal code of Pakistan, the

lowest age for the prosecution of any criminal act is 7 years; therefore, in jurisdictions

not protected by the JJSO, children over 7 who commit any illegal act where the court

determines that these children know the consequences of their acts can hold them

criminally responsible. There is also provision of bail in JJSO, 2000 for juveniles. If

ajuvenile detained for any non-bailable illegal act, police should bring him before the

exclusive court within 24 hours. A juvenile detained for a bailable crime must be

43
released, there are some reasons for believing that fetch him into relationship with any

unlawful or rendering the child to any risk. Under such conditions the juvenile should

be released on probation or placed in detention with aprobation officer but not in

police station. For any child under the age of fifteen years the description of a bailable

crime was extended to comprise all negative acts punishable with imprisonment

below ten years (SPARC, 2000).

The arresting officers must submit the investigation information within the

mandated period of time, which is 14 days. There are also some other issues such as

court hearings and administrative delays that extend holding of any law breaker that

may have a harmful effect on a first-time law breaker crippling them to the point that

could rely on involvement in negative acts to sustain themselves when they are

released (Parekh, 1999). Generally, there is a need of proper implementation of the

Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) that is apparent in the court records and

subsequent probation (UNICEF, 2006), the burden of which is borne by offenders

when they recidivate (Munir, 2007).

JJSO 2000, and the rules and regulation that apply to all four provinces of

Pakistan donot apply to KPK‘s PATA or FATA. Before the introduction of the JJSO

2000, only Sindh and Punjab provinces had separate legislation for juveniles. It is

definitely an improvement on earlier laws. While the protection it provides is

unequally implemented, it has led to a decrease of juvenile inmates. Two years after

the introduction of JJSO there were 4,979 juveniles at jail, but the number of these

juveniles has been reduced to half in the prisons since the end of 2010 (SPARC,

2010).

44
 Kazmi et al. (2013) clarified that Court procedures in Pakistan tend to be

disordered and delayed without cause. However, in documents the cases of juvenile

prisoners are judged in separate courts but in reality, this does not happen due to

procedural delays, court backlogs and failure of judges and police to prioritize

juvenile trials. The reality is that the whole legal system is based on a weak institution

that leads to leak out effects in special departments (i.e. cases of juveniles are often

delayed due to unavailability of exclusive courts for juveniles). By law, a juvenile

under confinement should be in front of judge in court within fourteen days of their

detainment. As declared by the United Nations report of Juvenile Justice in Asia

―many children remain in detention past the legal time limits, and for periods that

exceed the punishment for the crimes they are alleged to have committed‖. Such types

of delay in trial dates have psychological effects on juvenile inmates. In Pakistan

wardens and other jail staff are not trained to treat the juveniles in an appropriate way.

Also, the treatment of juveniles by the untrained jail staff and the lack of a counseling

center in tensify the matter as the juveniles integrate such ideas which increase the

probability of their illegal acts. According to JJSO 2000, court trials should not be in

front of the public. Still, some courts in Karachi combine proceedings with both

adults and juveniles and also state the name of the juvenile openly in courts which is,

again, against the ordinance.

Kazmi et al. (2013) pointed out that the convicted children do not know about

their legal rights, particularly those mentioned in JJSO 2000. Anees Jillani in a report

showed that the number of juvenile prisoners in Pakistani prisons reduced 50 percent

(from 5,000 juveniles to 2,500) which is a good and positive sign (Dawn, 2012).

45
 Provincial governments have responded proactively to such NGOs-initiated

projects. Nasir Aslam Zahid the ex-chief justice of Sindh High Court runs a legal aid

service for juvenile and women inmates with the collaboration of Sindh government.

In 2004, he established an NGO for female inmates to help them in their trials and

legal activities. Later Sindh Government formed a committee for female inmates and

after that juvenile was also added in this legal aid program. In 2004 they also

established a Legal Aid Office (LAO) in Karachi. The offices of LAO were

established in the Industrial Schools of Youthful Offenders and in special jails for

females. Zahid said, ―Statistics show that prior to the LAO‘s inception, women and

under age offenders would remain at jail for long periods with no assistance from the

government‖. With the Legal Aid Office founding, 652 juveniles‘ cases were

determined in four years after the establishment of the centre, and the women prisoner

population decrease from 237 to 108. To represent prisoners in court, the Legal Aid

Office arranges guarantee for inmates‘ bail. In 2008, about 100 juveniles and over 150

women were released on bail by the LAO (International Crisis Group, 2011).

In Karachi, Lawyers for Human Rights and Legal Aid (LHRLA) which was

headed by Zia Awan, provided legal support to inmates to make them aware of their

fundamental rights. Pamphlets distributed in the central prison of Karachi provided

prisoners with information about how to write an appeal in the absence of an advocate

(International Crisis Group, 2011).

There is a need of international aid to reduce the flaws in the prison system

and justice system. Asian Development Bank‘s $350-million Access to Justice

Program, completed in 2008, concentrated on justice administration, case load

management, including fiscal reforms, prosecution and judicial reforms, legal

46
empowerment and police, but ignored jails. The United States committed $51 million

for police assistance and rule of law in 2009 and $66.6 million for tactical training for

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa‘s law enforcement agencies in 2010 (International Crisis

Group, 2011).

Collaborating with organizations likes ICRC and the UNODC that have

confirmed track records in Pakistan, donors should allocate an important segment of

future rule-of-law aid to penal reform for development of new jails. The two main

international organizations UNODC and ICRC are working on a jail system. The

ICRC visits jails in Gilgit Baltistan, Azad Jammu Kashmir and Sindh to assess the

situation of imprisonment and management (International Crisis Group, 2011).

The ICRC organization worked and has improved water and sanitation

facilities in several Sindh jails, counting development of a water supply and

designation framework for a 50-bed healing center in Karachi's focal prison.

Contending that key punitive changes are truant from national and common

government approaches for the criminal equity area, it additionally plans to enhance

the limit of prison experts in everyday correctional facility administration (ICRC,

2011).

The ICRC also works on the contact of the detainees with their families and

those who are detained inside or outside of Pakistan. Donors should give funds to

improve prisoners‘ lives at jails and support them upon release from jails, whether on

probation or finishing of sentence. The funds should flow through legal aid NGOs

such as Justice Zia Awan‘s and Zahid‘s in Sindh as well as organizations that provide

education and other health facilities to inmates (International Crisis Group, 2011).

47
2.5 Lack of Exclusive Juvenile Courts

In 19th century in the United States children of seven years old were

sentenced to death like adult criminals in the court. Children under the age of seven

years were exempted from sentence because they did not understand the depth of their

crime (Schlossman, 1983).

In the U.S about 100 years ago a juvenile justice system was recognized

separately for juvenile offenders to protect them from harsh punishment. The courts

began to encourage the juveniles through rehabilitation. In this system, the judge was

acting for the rights of the juvenile. These rights were already available to adults, for

example, the right to know the charges brought against one, the right to confront one's

accuser, the right of legal counsels and the right of trials. For the future reintegration

and rehabilitation of the juvenile, the trials are kept confidential and not publicized.

The difference in the juvenile court is that in this system juveniles are not charged and

sent to jails but are sent to reformatory schools like Borstal Institutions. They are

minors and considered as delinquent not as criminals to be sent to jails (National

Research Council, 2001).

In Chicago in 1899 the first juvenile court was established with the Illinois

Juvenile Court Act of 1899. The act gave the court authority over delinquent and

neglected juveniles under the age of 16 years. The main objective was the reformation

and rehabilitation of the minors not the punishment. Due to the threat of societal

stigma the juvenile trials were kept confidential. The act also required separation

between adults and juveniles when imprisoned and it banned the confinement of

juveniles under the age of 12 years. By 1925, the idea of the exclusive court extended

quickly, and a functional juvenile exclusive court existed in every state except

Wyoming and Maine (Schlossman, 1983).

48
2.5.1 The Role of Juvenile Courts in the Services

Reformers said that treating juveniles as adult prisoners was gratuitously cruel

and motivate them towards further negative activities. According to historians the

establishment of the juvenile courts is a positive sign. Due to the child-saving

movement, juvenile cases were diverted from the criminal courts to juvenile courts

and showed that strong social control could be exerted over juveniles in order to

reform the behaviors (Platt, 1977; Schlossman, 1977).

The family or juvenile exclusive court is the center of the juvenile justice

system (Moore & Wakeling, 1997). In fact, the word juvenile justice is frequently

used synonymously with the juvenile court, but it also refers to other associated

establishments as well as the juvenile detention facilities, probation and defense

attorneys and police (Rosenheim, 1983).

The US has about 51 juvenile justice systems in which each state and the

District of Columbia has its own juvenile justice system with own laws (National

Research Council, 2001). The juvenile courts function differently from municipality

to municipality and county to county within a state. States that receive financial

support under the Delinquency Prevention Act and Federal Juvenile Justice should

follow certain requirements, for example, adults and juveniles should not be in the

same barrack, but it is the law of the state to govern the structure of correction

facilities and exclusive courts for juveniles (National Research Council, 2001).

Studies found that when juvenile cases were heard in adult courts, the recidivism rates

of juveniles were higher than those juveniles whose cases heard in juvenile courts,

even the brutality of crime was restricted (Bishop et al., 1996; Fagan, 1995;

Podkopacz & Feld, 1996).

49
 Levitt (1998) mentioned that in 1978-1993 data was collected from the

Department of Justice about discipline and he found that when the adult system is

more disciplinary the crime rate is decreased. Further he added that where the system

is not disciplinary crime rates increased in the juvenile system as well. This suggests

that it is the overall system not the adult or juvenile system that may discourage crime

in people.

2.5.2 Trends towards Juvenile Courts

Inthe 1910s, criticisms of the exclusive juvenile courts‘ justice and efficiency

began to be heard. One critical group questioned the court‘s informality; these critics

charged that it resulted in bias and lack of adherence to due process (Dawson, 1990).

For status offenses juveniles processed through juvenile justice system may be

institutionalized in other facilities like alcohol treatment facilities, or drug and private

mental health facilities. Juveniles kept in the same correctional facility with adult

prisoners require a focus on the necessities of juveniles under Delinquency Prevention

Act. Separation of adults from juvenile inmates in correctional facilities and the

removal of juvenile inmates from adult prisons were necessary. The act was amended

in 1988, to involve states to address inconsistent imprisonment of children. In reaction

to community concern over crime committed by adolescents and children, aggressive

crime in particular, by the 1990s almost all countries had made some changes in their

juvenile justice system (National Research Council, 2001).

2.5.3 Probation and Juvenile Courts

About two thirds of juveniles leave on probation and one fifth of those

juveniles found not guilty and one third of the juveniles‘ case have no exclusive

courts are released on probation (Stahl et al., 1999).

50
 Probation is a type of supervision designed to avoid recidivism or re-offending.

Research finds that surveillance alone may be inadequate to stop reoffending; probation

programs mingle both surveillance and treatment (Petersilia, 1997). According to the

founders of exclusive juvenile courts, probation is considered the most important

component of the exclusive juvenile court system (Schlossman, 1983). Probation of

juveniles at their home is the right way for the proper rehabilitation and counseling

instead of sending juveniles to jails. Probation officers get to know about the juvenile‘s

family, peer group and other relatives to provide proper guidance. Even if the probation

is not properly applied according to the standard of the juvenile court, it is still better

than sending a juvenile to jail (Torbet et al., 1996).

2.5.4 Juvenile Courts in Pakistani Context

Pakistan has not formed a single juvenile court in the last 18 years since the

ratification of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance in 2000. An advocate, Anees

Jillani of the Supreme Court, talking to a contributor said that we have to re-evaluate

the criminal responsibility age of a child, which is 7 years in Pakistan. In some

countries such as Afghanistan, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is 11 years

and in some other countries the age of criminal responsibility is 13 to 15 years. Jillani

said, ―According to my point of view, we should have punishment for juveniles, but

they should have different procedures for the trial and in the jails their counseling

should be done, in order to reform them,‖ he worried. ―Unfortunately, I have seen

children at jails who spent years for ignorable crimes. A child in Karachi jail spent

four years just because he had stolen a parrot. Another one was arrested because he

had stolen flour from a shop‖ (Dawn, 2012). Jillani suggested that ―we should

introduce community punishment for children. Under the present system Station

House Officers are bound to lodge FIR against juveniles. In Europe police officers or

51
court can send a child in some welfare centre to work for some time as a form of

punishment‖ (Dawn, 2012).

The facts showed that although the JJSO, 2000 was officially in effect on

paper, in reality juvenile offenders are treated as criminal adults. According to Section

3(1) of the JJSO 2000, government has the responsibility to provide free legal help to

juveniles but up to this time no juvenile has been given free legal help. Also, while

Section 4(1) of JJSO, 2000 mandates that provincial and federal governments have to

establish a juvenile court in each district, no exclusive court has been established

anywhere in whole country. Provincial governments have tasked existing family or

civil courts to hear the cases of juvenile offenders (Ramzan, 2014).

2.6 Relations' of Juveniles with Gangsters

Fong and Buentello (1991) found that there are very scarce data regarding gangs

in prison and they have given three reasons behind this scarcity of data which are; most

of the data are available only for public use, security measurement in the jails are the

second reason and third is that gangs members want to keep their information

confidential. The enlargement and spreading of youth gangs in different cities and rural

areas have increased the attention of policy makers and government in the US in order

to create efficient social policy for the eradication of this social problem. Government

attention to this issue is quite natural as there around three thousand gangs and 800

thousand gang members across the US (Howell & Lynch, 2000).

2.6.1 Nature of Gangs at Prisons

Gangs in prisons have a formal structure and most often one person leads the

group and all other members of the gang are subordinate and follow the decision of

the leader as the leader‘s decision is final. The gang has a formal hierarchy where

52
gang members‘ work on different position and their crimes are more organized in

nature than those outside the jails (Decker, Bynum & Weisel, 1998).

Whenever juvenile offenders are present in adult jails, then the relationships

between youth and adult gangs are deeper. The gang members in the prison are more

violent than those of other inmates and they are also responsible for violent activities

and have control over drug trafficking in prisons (Jackson & McBride, 1985; Ralph et

al., 1996). Juvenile prisoners in adult prison are more vulnerable to prison gang

membership (Ralph et al., 1996). On the other hand, prison gang members also help in

the establishment and growth of youth gangs in prisons. There is also the factor of ex-

convicts‘ involvement in the prison which increases the rate of crime and life of the

gang in the prisons as they are used to the criminal activities. They tend to engage in

criminal activities more than other gang members and their history impacts their

criminal tendency more than other prison gang members (Moore, 1978; Vigil & Long,

1990). In some cities, prisons gangs have dominancy over juvenile gangs in drug

trafficking related activities (Valdez, 1997).

The connection between juvenile gangs and adult organizations is an

important area of research (Thrasher, 1927). There are some evident of scavenger

gangs turning into full-fledged juvenile gangs, which were analyzed from the cases of

42 gangs in Chicago (Taylor, 1990). Spergel (1995) stated that there is also some

evidence that some street gangs transform into criminal organizations but Wilkinson

and Fagan (1996) argued that the transformation of juvenile gangs into criminal

organizations are not the only pattern through which criminal organizations are

formed. Klein (1995) stated that the facts in the formation of criminal organizations

have multiple factors like the individuals in the group, and the talents of the individual

but not of the group are the factors which are responsible for criminal organization

formation.

53
 The history of the gangs and their record are very old in the prisons of US as

these groups have existed there from very long time. Gypsy Jokers was the first gang

which was formed in the Washington State Prison in 1950 (Orlando-Morningstar, 1997;

Stastny & Tyrnauer, 1983). The Mexican Mafia was the first prison gang with links to

other prison gangs in the US. The Mexican Mafia came into being in 1957 in a prison in

California. There are a majority of inmates associated with prison gangs in the US.

Almost 90 percent of inmates are associated with prison gangs in the prisons inIllinois

(Lane, 1989). These gangs mostly come from the Chicago streets (Jacobs, 1974).

2.6.2 Role of Prison Gang in the Formal Correction Institutions

Skarbeck (2014) argued that prison gangs are a major source of disruption,

misconduct, and violence for the correctional officials. Gangs in jails encourage

feeding of meticulous ingredient, prostitution, gambling, and other illigal actions. It is

objectionable for jail staff to concentrate only the negative aspects of gangs rather

than their positive aspects. Gangs in prison provide safety to their members and avoid

disputes among the members. There is no practical implementation to deal the gang

members positively by the jail authority. Though, specified the demographics of the

prisoners and the failure to rely on rules, jail cliques are the low-cost fabricator of

supremacy in the prisoners‘ social structure. This doesn‘t infer that they are the first-

best solution, but comparative to a sternly norm-based government, jail gangs recover

instruction.

2.6.3 Prison Gangs and Violence

According to many researchers, gangs in prison control the drug bargaining

and they argue that most jail violence can be attributed to jail gangs (Ingraham &

Wellford, 1987). For example, in one facility, although gang members comprised only

54
3 percent of the total population of the jail, they caused 50 percent of the jail violence

and disturbances (Camp & Camp, 1985). In a restricted region with a limited number

of drug customers and clients seeking related services such as prostitution and

gambling, the scene is set for inter-gang contests, particularly in overcrowded jails

(Fleisher, 1989). ―Turf wars‖ take placeat the jail and on the street where gang

members and non-gang members are crammed, leaving few options for escape to a

neutral and safe place (Fong, Vogel & Buentello, 1992).

While gang relationships in jails are diverse a number of studies using

differing methodologies and literature demonstrate that gang membership is related to

jail misconduct. In an example from Hepburn, Arizona and Griffin reported that

membership in a jail gang was considerably related to jail misbehavior. Similarly, in

Texas (Ralph & Marquart, 1991), and in Florida (Cunningham & Sorensen, 2007), it

is reported that after controlling for past imprisonment time at jail, relationship with

other gangsters and demographic features for such factors as past incarceration, time

at jail, socio-demographic characteristics and seriousness of offense, jail gang

members were considerably more likely to be involved in jail misbehavior than those

who were not in relationships with gangs. Moreover, literature revealed that even

when gang members comprised only small numbers of inmates, they were responsible

for misconduct. Though Gaes et al., (2002) criticized the above postulates and added

that misbehavior due to gang relationships was not the only cause but attributed

misbehavior to length of sentence as well; he found that those prisoners whose

sentence were longer tended to be more involved in violent jail misbehavior.

Juvenile participation in gangs appears to lead to an increase in negative

activities; however, these activities may be limited in scope and duration. Studies

examining juveniles who join gangs found that the negative activities of that group

55
who joined the gang were similar to that of the non-gang juveniles. When these

juveniles become a member of the gang, their participation in negative activities

increased mainly in aggressive delinquency and drug sales. Though when these

juveniles were released from jail their involvement in negative activities decreased

(Thornberry, 1998).

2.6.4 Victimization of Inmates

Another harmful understanding of juvenile association with gang focuses on

persecution, signifying that individuals experience distress from the ruthless

environment of the legal institution but also from harassment from other prisoners

(Chong, 2013).

2.6.5 Gangs in Juvenile Correctional Facilities

Ralph et al. (1996) contends that imprisonment in an exclusive juvenile jail is

a robust indicator of adult jail gangs‘ membership. According to Decker et al. (1998),

in return jail gangs assist to the increase of youth gangs. Jail gangs have also gang

membership outside jail their Brotherhood originated like Mexican, Aryan and Texas

Syndicate. On the other hand, most street gangs have members at jail. Older members

of the gang from juvenile jails return to street gangs and form larger dangerous gangs

with their old teenage friends (Fleisher, 1995). Interest of ex-gang members in

juvenile gangs, due to this the level of the violent crime increases because they have

gained experience in their imprisonment time (Moore, 1978). While juvenile gang

definitions vary in different areas a basic definition includes: a group which is formed

by juveniles in a particular area they united to control their common interest, for

interaction purposes they use different gestures, and they are collectively involved in

any type of crime (Curry & Decker, 1998).

56
2.6.6 Youth Gang Proliferation

Juvenile gangs are present in various cities with constant gang problems such

as Los Angeles and Chicago (Klein, 1995). According to the Chicago Crime

Commission (1995), in Chicago there are about 132 gangs, and collectively have

about 50,000 members. Block and Block (1993) estimated that the four main, most

criminally active gangs in Chicago are, Vice Lords, the Latin Kings, the Latin

Disciples and the Black Gangster Disciples Nation, they are about 19,000 and

responsible for two-thirds of the gang crimes. Police estimated that there are about

60,000 gang members in Los Angeles due to these statistics these gang members

create a lot of problems in the city (National Youth Gang Center, 1997).

2.6.7 Problems faced by Gangs in Juvenile Correctional Facilities

Sheley and Wright (1995) surveyed a sample of more than 800 male offenders

in 4 states of the United States in 6 juvenile jails experiencing youth gang problems.

They added that about 68 percent of the offenders reported that they had relations

with gangs or quasi gangs. Members of the gangs possessed guns which non-gang

members did not, about 81 percent of the gang members possessed a pistol, and every

3rd person possessed automatic hand guns; 84 percent of the prisoners said that very

soon they would get a weapon.

The conception of gangs or membership in gang is also important because

these inmates want to secure themselves. In the Illinois state, the Vice Lords of

Chicago originated a Training School for Boys when numerous inhabitants

determined to form a new gang with affiliations with other larger gangs, hoping to

form the toughest gang in the state in Chicago (Dawley, 1992; Keiser, 1969).

Imprisonment in an exclusive juvenile jail is a precursor of membership in an adult

jail gang (Ralph et al., 1996).

57
2.6.8 Factors leading to Membership of a Gang

A main difference in juvenile gang violence can be found in the associations

between the community and gang. Primarily, the gang‘s importance goes ahead of its

affiliation to members of the gangs. Gangs serve as transmitters of society culture and

customs (Miller, 1958; Moore, 1978). A juvenile's association with a gang influences

how other people respond them. For example, Esbensen and Huizinga (1993) posit

that negative classification of gangs is connected to prominent offenses. Gang

membership also provides opportunities for making money by selling items such as

drugs and arms. Thus, many juveniles join gangs for their personal benefit (Sanchez-

Jankowski, 1991).

Some cultural, financial and social factors are responsible for prompting

juveniles to join gangs, aside from these reasons, some join gangs to ensure their

safety from other gangs (Baccaglini, 1993; Decker & Van, 1996). Some social

scientists contend that the "underclass" (Wilson, 1987) position of juveniles serves to

push them into gangs (Hagedorn, 1988; Moore, 1978; Taylor, 1989; Vigil, 1988).

Some of the juveniles who feel marginalized may join gangs for interaction, to pass

time, and find friends (Vigil & Long, 1990). In jails, juveniles facing numerous

problems may turn to gangs to help them solve their adjustment and trial problems

(Short & Strodtbeck, 1965). Juveniles in some societies are recruited intensively into

gangs (Johnstone, 1983). Some juveniles are born in the gangs because of their

traditions, culture and the involvement of their parents with the gangs (Moore, 1978).

2.6.9 Risk Factors for Gang Membership

According to Thornberry (1998), most of the juveniles join gangs because of

their low attachment to the members of the society and family. Factors which compel

58
a child to join gangs include low parental supervision, lack of biological parents, low

concentration of parents towards child and poverty. Other factors are related to school

environment including low attachment of children with teacher, lack of objectives

making success, and an environment where most of the children are not committed to

their school work. Negative or delinquent peer group is also considered as a main

factor to push a child to gang because friends are the strongest motivator to prompt

any activity. More factors that could prompt a child to join a gang would include easy

access to drugs, depressive symptoms, numerous negative life events and low self-

esteem. Finally, juveniles who are involved in delinquency and who use drugs are

more likely to join gangs than those children who are not users of drugs and who are

not involved in negative acts.

Seattle researchers compared some factors with Thornberry‘s analysis of

juveniles who join gangs. Some factors recognized in the study were whether drugs

were easily available. Numerous family factors are important: sibling anti-social

behavior, parents with violent attitudes, family management problems, extreme

economic deprivation and family instability. Several school factors were identified,

low grades, the identity of being learning disabled, low school attachment, low

commitment to school, including low educational aspiration and low achievement test

scores. Other factors included association with law breaking friends, the early use of

marijuana, alcohol, hyperactivity, earlier delinquency, rule breaking, hostility and

aggression, early sexual activity and low mentality level in refusing offers to engage

in negative activities. Feeling insecure, marginalized and living in a poor family are

the main individual factors causing youth to associate with gangs. But the most

important risk of the juvenile is the relation with gangsters in adolescence (Kosterman

et al., 1996).

59
2.6.10 Impacts of Juvenile Gangs

Juvenile members of gangs commit more serious offenses more than non-gang

juveniles. In Colorado, juveniles in relations with gang committed more than three

time more crimes than those juveniles who have no relation with any type of gangs.

Seattle gang juveniles self-reported that they were involved in negative activities

more than those who were not in gangs; they were involved in robbery, hitting

someone, and in fighting (Esbensen & Huizinga, 1993). According to Moore (1991),

"gangs are no longer just at the rowdy end of the continuum of local adolescent

groups they are now really outside the continuum". Kosterman et al. (1996) observed

that for those juveniles who remained or were only one year in a gang the negative

acts like felony, drugs and trafficking were low in contrast of those juveniles who

remained more than one year in a gang.

Miller (1974) mentioned that from one city to another city level of gang

violence are different. Within any particular gang the level of violence is different

from one gang to another (Moore, 1988; Fagan, 1989). The level of violence is also

different from society to society (Block & Block, 1993). Violence is not fixed it

depends on the gang. When the group or gang evolves, changes in violence occur

(Moore, 1988).

Juveniles who possess guns for their protection are six times more likely to

carry guns for show or entertainment. They are eight times more likely to commit

crime with a pistol or gun. Those juveniles who possess guns are five times more

likely to connect with a gang, three times more to become involved in serious and

negative activities, four times morelikely to sell drugs than those juveniles who do not

possess guns (Lizotte, Tesoriero, Thornberry, & Krohn, 1994). Juveniles hire in gangs

who possess pistol and other sophisticated guns, gang members are more likely to

60
have guns than non-gang members, more likely to have friends who also have guns

(Bjerregaard & Lizotte, 1995).

Juveniles who join gangs have always some type of guns or other weapons

(Newton & Zimring, 1969). Studies showed that members of the gangs unlawfully

possess guns (Sheley & Wright, 1995) and physical attack increased gradually (Block

& Block, 1993) because of the accessibility to more advanced arms. Members of

gangs possess guns for their safety because they know that their rivals also have arms.

Decker and Van (1996) mentioned that the demand of arms or other weapons

increased because of the rival gangs‘ fire and created violence in the area. They use

and demand for more sophisticated guns that they not feel any type of difficulty in

rivalry (Horowitz, 1983).

2.6.11 Relation of Juveniles with Gangs in Pakistani Context

In Pakistan there are different types of gangs related or working on the name

of geographic areas, ethnic, economic and political. Karachi has more than 21 million

populations belonging to different types of religious, ethnic and political groups. Most

of the political parties in Karachi have gangs involved in major street crimes. There

are some areas in Karachi where no one has allowed police and other faction group of

political parties. Gangs are fully involved in street crimes in these areas such as

abduction, kidnapping, rape and robbery. The most severe gangs involve children for

their interest, but it could be difficult to know the number of the children they involve

in these crimes (Calder, 2013).

Calder (2013) further added that due to unemployment, hunger and poverty

most of the children are involved in beggar gangs. These juveniles come from rural

areas to big cities for begging and some of them are sold to other gangs who then

break their body parts in order to create sympathy from passers-by as they beg on the

streets.

61
 In Pakistan there are about 170, 000 street children who are at high risk of

sexual abuse. Ali himself from a gang said that ―it was just the third night I slept on a

street when a policeman picked me up and did bad things to me. I cried a lot, but no

one came to help me,‖ Ali is now 17 years old, he said the reporter (The Express

Tribune, 2011).

Ali was sexually abused for the second time by the street gang leader, who

further forced him to join the other 17 children in the gang. By the age of 14 years

Ali was a full-time sex worker. His leader gave him a cell phone to keep in contact

with the other children for sexual activity. At the age of 16 years Ali wanted to

escape from that gang with the help of an NGO to begin work as a photographer. He

said that ―I was happy with my work, but a year ago, a policeman put me in the

lockup on a false charge, confiscated my camera and abused me sexually‖. The

experience again pushed him into the gang‘s world. ―I decided to become stronger.

Now I have my own gang and many influential people are my clients. No one can

touch me now.‖ Ali says he is working as a pimp to more than 10 children by taking

some money from whatever the children earn. ―Half an hour after finishing with one

client I get another call and I forget all about wanting a respectable life‖ (The

Express Tribune, 2011). According to an NGO which works for the rights and

protection of street children, up to 90 percent of children are sexually abused on the

first night they sleep on street and 60 percent children accused police of sexually

abusing them (The Express Tribune, 2011).

Children in the gangs are mostly refugees from Afghanistan, fleeing from the

earthquake of 2005, the war against terrorism, and from floods in 2010 (Jaine, 2012).

Children become easily attracted to gangs; Amjad was a child who joined a peer

group who were already involved in negative activities like mobile snatching,

62
robbery, keeping illegal weapons, stealing and drugs. Amjad was 17 years when he

was arrested for the sixth time and sent to a jail in Karachi. When he was released

from jail he again joined the bad company, he said that he confessed to the judge who

released him on his personal surety. But after his release, when he went home his

brother beat him and he ran away from home and joined the same peer group and

lived in the friend‘s home (The Express Tribune, 2011).

The news item further quotes a prisoner, Amjad, as saying that there are

numerous children involved in crimes with the help of political support in different

areas of Karachi. There were four boys in the gang and all were from poor families.

The elder brother of Amjad said that Amjad was arrested by the police in August

2012 for the second time and sent to adult jail in Karachi. Amjad‘s brother further

said that this is good that his brother is in jail because he is a drug user and if he came

out of jail he would kill someone or be killed. The members of the gangs along with

Amjad engage in snatching mobiles, money and are involved in robberies. His father

is a very poor unskilled laborer in a hotel and was not in aposition to support Amjad‘s

education. There was no one in the family who could properly counsel Amjad to

avoid joining a street gang (The Express Tribune, 2011).

Nowadays the trend of street gang involvement is changing it is increasing in

upper class children who come from affluent families, but who do not receive proper

attention from their parents. They take guns and are prone to becoming involved in

negative activities (Dawood & Zafar, 2003).

There are different reasons or factors of juvenile delinquency in Pakistan such

as drug use, honor killing, illiteracy, sexual assault, land and money. Especially in the

63
current scenario the militancy, terrorism and deeni madaris (religious schools) has

opened a way for delinquency. The Cyber Net has developed a propensity in children

in both developing and developed countries and Pakistan is also in the list of juvenile

delinquency (Nadeem, 2002).

2.7 Well-being of Juveniles

There is no exact definition of the well-being of child, but most definitions

include some important indicators that include, social and emotional health, economic

security, academic and intellectual achievement, mental health, behavior and physical

health, safety of the child and physical environment (Lou et al., 2008). According to

the Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF) well-being framework

adopted from Lou et al. (2008) there is a focus on three components. The first one is

the socio-emotional well-being which consists of social functioning, cognitive

functioning, physical functioning and emotional/behavioral functioning. Social

functioning includes the attachment of the person, adaptive behaviors, relationships

and interaction, and social competence. Cognitive functions include decision making,

problem solving skills, development of language, school engagement and academic

achievement. Emotional/behavioral functions include personal self-control,

externalizing behaviors, motivation, prosocial behavior and emotional regulation. It

also includes ability of the child, surrounding environment, identity of the person, and

social capital (Samuels, 2011).

―To focus on social and emotional well-being is to attend to

children's behavioral, emotional and social functioning those

skills, capacities, and characteristics that enable young people

to understand and navigate their world in healthy, positive

ways. While it is important to consider the overall well-being

64
 of children who have experienced abuse and neglect, a focus on

the social and emotional aspects of well-being can significantly

improve outcomes for these children while they are receiving

child protection services and after their cases have closed‖

(U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration

on Children, & Youth Families, 2012, p. 1).

At the University of Minnesota, Dr. Mary Jo Kreitzer developed the Center for

Spirituality and Healing (CSH) well-being model. She describes well-being as

something related to a state of balance in body, spirit, and mind. She labels the CSH

model with the following indicators: community, purpose, environment, relationship,

health and security. Kreitzer defines community as geographic, which can contain

states, provinces, cities, towns and neighborhoods; she defined purpose as the

direction/way of a person‘s ability to find his goal in a proper manner through the said

direction. She defines environment as interaction and relationships with other people

to get exposure to environment like access to parks, clean air, water, and exposure to

nature. Relationships are defined as personal relationships through which a person can

get emotional support from his/her relationship. By health she explains that the

meaning is broad, but the main points of health involve cognitive functioning,

behavior and physical health of a person. The last indicator, security, is defined as it is

related to personal freedom/liberty from any kind of economic instability and safety

of a person. She concluded that these six are the main indicators of well-being of a

person (Delegran et al., 2012).

Children require early education, health, welfare, prosperity, happiness, and

safety in order to be considers as contributing to the well-being of the child. The

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in Article 25 gives that each

individual has the privilege of standard living and satisfactory well-being offices and

65
prosperity of himself. The Standard Minimum Rules (SMR), decides 49-53 specify

that therapeutic care, for example, ophthalmological, mental and dental care and

particularly medicinally showed eating routine ought to be given to adolescent

detainees. Such juveniles should be treated positively and should be examine a

medical doctor from the time of their incarceration and accommodated them in

hygienic environment (UN, 2005).

In the history of the United States Congress reunite the juveniles and adult

inmates in the same jails in the new juvenile justice legislation. Law enforcement

agencies, criminologists and child lawyers suggested to Congress that housing adults

and juveniles in the same jail create more destructive problems for juveniles. The

counseling, rehabilitation and well-being of juveniles will suffer as juveniles will

become addicted to drugs, they will face social marginalization, adult prisoners will

sexually exploit them, juveniles will face psychological problems and after release

from jail they will become more violent criminals (Dilulio, 1996; Ziedenberg &

Schiraldi, 1998).

According to Soler (1997), juveniles imprisoned with adult gang members are

more vulnerable to sexual exploitation and assault. Some of these sexually exploited

and assaulted juveniles commit suicide. Adult gang members use juveniles as their

servants; they provide drugs and weapons to juveniles. The recidivism rate increases

for those juveniles who are imprisoned in the same jail with adult gang members. Due

to relations with gang members, juveniles get some support from them but in reality,

the counseling, positive socialization and rehabilitation of juveniles becomes

impossible and they adopt negative and criminal behavior from these adult gang

members.

66
 According to Fagan, et al. (1989), juveniles are often raped and assaulted in

adult jails by the adult prisoners and jail staff. It has been reported that juveniles are

more likely to be attacked with weapons. They face different kinds of threat in adult

jails like suicide, assault and sexual exploitation by jail staff and adult criminals.

Fagan writes that juveniles imprisoned with adult criminals will create more problems

and later consequences will be dangerous for society because juveniles who are

exploited in jails will vent their rage on other juveniles and women. Due to the lack of

a proper probation system, lack of exclusive jails for juveniles for their proper

rehabilitation, counseling and socialization is not possible in the adult jails. The well-

being of juveniles is not possible in such environments where jail staff and adult

prisoners sexually, psychologically and socially exploit the juvenile inmates.

2.7.1 Social Marginalization

Social marginalization is a multidimensional practice of progressive social

breakdown. It separates people and social relations, and prevents them from complete

involvement in normal, normatively approved activities of the society in which they

reside (Silver, 2007).

Those children who commit a crime are exposed to risk in society. UN

guidelines and the Convention on the Rights of Children (CRC) support all those

actions taken by different governments and organizations which protect self-esteem

and rehabilitation into community of those children who are in conflict with law. The

majority of children in South Asia are deprived of basic rights like liberty and

freedom of speech and expression because institutionalization was given top priority.

The examples can be seen everywhere when juveniles face police or come before the

judge. These risks need to be eliminated through proper policies and procedures

(UNICEF, 2006).

67
 There are some cases where children and adults receive equal treatment by the

legal authority and officials, however, children who break the law get very little

sympathy from the general population. There is also strong need for awareness among

the general population about rehabilitation and protection of the rights of the children

who are in conflict with the law. Information about the justice system and special

rights and privileges that a child should be awarded, should be given to children and

parents, in order that we could protect them from the arbitrary action by the justice

system and no one could exploit them. Most of the countries take action for the rights

of the child, but still there is much need of awareness activities which are targeted to

child rights. Material on child rights in conflict with laws have been distributed

among the justice system officials, but not among the general public (UNICEF, 2006).

Juveniles Labeled as Stigmatized

Labeling theory argues that those who commit a crime are stigmatized by the

society and their crime makes them stigmatized and influences their behavior and

personality in turn. Individuals, who commit crime, face problem when participating

in different social activities due tothe stigma on his/her personality. These types of

people are not accepted by society as other member make them marginalize and they

face hindrances at school, at home, at job and participating in social life as they are

labeled as an offender and deviance is expected from them. They lost support from

family, friends and community and they rejected these institutions and feel withdraw

from the society and join their counter part who will support and accept them.

Deviance behavior is most probable in this new culture from these people

(Braithwaite, 1989).

68
 This kind of treatment has serious impacts on juveniles and particularly on

juvenile delinquents. At the adolescent stage, a juvenile‘s personality is shaped either

as a conformist or a deviant. Stigmatized and marginalized adolescents may become

career offenders and recidivists. International evidence demonstrates that children

who observe hostility at home are more like to be deviant. One of the risk factors for

delinquent behavior is child abuse and it is associated with the delinquent behavior of

a child. Children living outside their homes are most vulnerable to child abuse and

hence may lead to delinquent behavior (Maertens & Anstey, 2007).

Some of the determinants of hostility among juveniles are corrupt law making

and enforcing agencies, a loosely structured legal system and loose rules and

regulations that give people freedom and hence the crime rate may increase. Some of

the factors like terrorism, border conflict, an international military involvement,

accessibility of small arms and light weapons and abuse of state force all increase

deviant behavior among children (Hilker & Fraser, 2009).

Extensive research found that homelessness; child abuse and child neglect has

significant relations with criminal activity. Research further demonstrates that

children who have gone through these kinds of experiences have a higher risk of

becoming criminal than those who have not gone through such experiences (Health &

Welfare, 2012).

Different measures exist across the world at the state level and NGOs‘ to

protect juveniles and youth from becoming deviant and criminals. Every year at least

100 thousand socially disadvantaged minors and youthful Australians are given

homelessness services, 30 thousand have been identified as substance abusers by a

child protection agency, 70 thousand are protected against the violence of police, and

69
14 thousand more are given services in safe detention centers under proper

supervision (Health & Welfare, 2012).

Many researchers in the past found that there is a strong relation between

poverty and delinquency. Children who were brought up in poor families have a

higher risk of crime than those who were brought up in wealthy families. Moreover,

the age of children whoface poverty is very important (Sickmund & Puzzanchera,

2014).

One of the studies on the relationship between family structure and crime

found that children between 12 to 17 years of age who live with one of their

biological parents are less likely than those who live in the absence of one of their

biological parents to report deviant behavior like running away from home, theft,

sexual behavior and assault (McCurley & Snyder, 2004)

In African countries, delinquent behavior is the product of unemployment,

poverty and extreme hunger. These juveniles form a disadvantaged group who live in

the society as marginalized individuals at risk of crime and deviance. Population

growth in Africa is so fast because 790 thousand youth enter to labor market where

there are 60 thousand jobs created annually. Most African poor people live in

overcrowded areas with unhealthy living conditions and lack basic needs of life.

Street children and orphans face seriously risky situations like armed conflict,

HIV/AIDS and collapse of old living patterns. Juvenile delinquency is also linked

with the rapid transformation of social, political and economic circumstances. The

major types of crimes committed by juveniles include theft, robbery, smuggling,

prostitution, drug use and drugs trafficking (Howell, 2003).

70
 The extreme poverty, unemployment and social exclusion make the condition

more serious for juveniles and youth as it causes marginalization and make them

vulnerable to delinquency and crime and hinders their development. This environment

helps youth and juvenile to make sub-culture of delinquency where they engage in

different types of criminal activities. The phenomenon of delinquency and crime are

mainly associated with males as the rates of delinquency are more than double in

males than in females. Moreover, some types of criminal activities are also related to

intolerance for other religious or culture groups (Howell, 2003). The juveniles in

Africa, due to delinquent behavior and jail sentences, become more marginalized in a

sense that they become poorer day by day. They also face unemployment after getting

released from jail and mostly eat unhealthy foods (Rutigliano, 2008).

Case studies of Central American and Mexican juveniles have shown that they

are vulnerable to delinquent behavior and tend to join gangs due to their poor and

marginalized family background living urban settlements with limited resources.

These juveniles don‘t have access to education nor do they have job opportunities.

They occupy the levels in the gang hierarchy and carry the lowest status. Their status

and rank in the gang improves as they become sympathetic and spend time in gang

culture. Moreover, their membership becomes fixed and permanent if there are no

opportunities to satisfy their needs (Enzmann & Wetzels, 2003).

In South Africa youth join gangs because of their marginalization; gang

membership makes them feel accepted. The National Party, the governing party in

South Africa until 1994, created a system of racial segregation called apartheid that

was in place between 1948-1991. This forced segregation led some youth join

political groups that arose against these kinds of policies implemented by the

71
governing party. Youth have different types of needs that are the reason behind they

make association with the diverse kind of gangs (Rutigliano, 2008). There are gangs

which are joined by the youth for support and guidance purposes and inside the gangs

all member treats each other like a family because of the sense of belongingness and

acceptance. There are huge numbers of juvenile gangs in the urban areas of Mexico,

for example 1500 street gangs are present in Mexico City alone. These gangs range

from small local gangs to international gangs like MS-18 and MS-13. Members of

these gangs are mostly from marginalized urban areas and have adjustment problems

before joining these gangs. They are mostly involved in robberies and have mostly

homemade arms. These street gangs draw large numbers of youth and recruit juvenile

who as a drug couriers for the gangs and mostly occupy the lower ranks (Evans et al.,

2006).

Services for Marginalized Juvenile Prisoners

Disadvantaged, vulnerable and marginalized juveniles should be given more

priority and problems experienced by youth in conflict with the law should be the

primary concern if delinquency policies are to be successful. Through different

support projects, the administration of juvenile justice and local authorities should

work towards minimizing youth crime and focus on rehabilitation preparing those

who commit crimes to once again become a productive member of community

(Bankston & Pattillo-McCoy, 2000).

There are ―open‖ juvenile facilities in a number of countries including the UK,

US, Australia and Canada. There are 10 to 15 children living in an unlocked home

like environment, having minimal security and relying mostly on the supervision of

trained staff who knows how to deal with these juveniles. These open houses are

72
mostly run by NGOs on contract with government. In this open custody, juveniles

can attend school or any other vocational training along with other non-offending

children. They may also partake of structured programs like independent living

training, counseling sessions and skills programs. Juveniles are supported in finding

jobs for themselves, in making relationships with their families, provided with the

necessary level of support and supervision but they avoid the negative impacts of

closed custodies. This kind of open custody is very helpful for non-violent offenders

and those from whom there is no threat to the community but all they need is parental

care which they may be deprived of. One of the primary focuses of open custody is to

prevent juvenile offenders from marginalization and stigmatization (UNICEF, 2006).

The Turkish open prison is another kind of open custody where juveniles are

not in isolation; rather they interact and participate in communal practices and events.

The majority of children leave these open prisons every day for schools, jobs and for

entertainment purposes, but they do not escape from these open prisons because they

have more prosperous lives and facilities than those at jails. At the primary level

juveniles are given education at jail and they go to school outside after primary. They

are taught skills and vocational training where they can earn money after 15 years of

age by working outside jails in different industries depending on their skill and

capacities. There is 3 percent quota for ex-offenders in Turkish legislation where

these juveniles are adjusted in different industries and factories. Open prison also

arranges trips for juveniles to cinema, theater, TV studios, museums, and play

grounds for entertainment. Although some juvenile offenders have been placed in the

Reformatory for serious offences (e.g. murder, sex crimes) the community prefers to

integrate these young people back into the community, and they support the

institution by providing art and craft skills, teaching the juveniles and playing with

them irrespectively of their criminal record (UNICEF, 2006, p. 131).

73
 The efforts of and cooperation between organizations that support child

welfare, health care, orphanages and education of the public sector about juvenile

justice issues can reduce juvenile delinquency because the Juvenile Justice System is

the only public system which involves marginalized juveniles (Watson & Edleman,

2012).

There is a strong relationship between juveniles‘ delinquency and

marginalization. By studying these relationships, many questions arose whose

answers can be found through research. The prison system releases hundreds of

thousands of prisoners each year, has the high rate of incarceration exacerbated

conditions for juveniles or made it better for them by drawing the attention of

authorities to their situation? Does modern imprisonment make our youth and juvenile

marginalized after they are released? Do they hold lower status in the community?

Does our justice system cut them off from the privileges and rights of society? Is the

state policy reflecting the goal of reintegration, rehabilitation and counseling of

offenders (Visher & Travis, 2003)?.

2.7.2 Recidivism

Recidivism is defined as occurring when a prisoner who has been released is

caught again, whether on the same charge or through engaging in any other criminal

activity. Furthermore, it is noted that sometimes after releasing and counseling

prisoners, they may again become involved in negative acts. It is believed that most

inmates will return to jail for committing a number of different types of crime because

they learn new techniques in jail. In 2011 a report published by the Pew Center of the

U.S observed that the level of recidivism of released inmates stood at 43.3%. In

Pakistan, the situation is not so different. Inmates often emerge from jail as

74
professional criminals and are again sent to the same jail. This cycle is partially due to

the corrupt security system in Sindh, to a lack of staff to solve the problem then the

cases become a burden on the courts. Because bureaucrats do not pay proper attention

to this problem, the situation become worse and it results in the high number of

inmates under trial in Sindh. Before they receive a proper judicial forum, a prisoner

can wait about 6 to 24 months. During this time, they are housed with dangerous

criminals and terrorists; they learn advanced ways of crimes from these criminals

(Henslin, 2008).

Trulson et al. (2005) examined the recidivism rate among a group of juveniles

who were released from a south western correctional facility. They studied 2,436

juveniles after their release for five years. Their analysis showed that 85 percent of the

juveniles were again arrested in the defined time. Those who were gang members had

mental problems and had more felony arrests in conflict with criminal justice system

become more likely to recidivate. The authors concluded that those who had strong

relationships with gang members became influence by them and, therefore, were more

likely to recidivate.

Caudill (2009) found that those offenders who had relations with gang

members had a higher rate of recidivism than those who had no relations with any

type of gangs at the jail. The timing with gang relation was found to be significant and

had a high impact on time of release and re-arrest after a discharge of four months.

Caudill identified jail gang members and focused on the life of the persons after their

release for some months.

75
Predicting Recidivism

One more area of research involves predicting recidivism according to a

measure that estimates the danger of re-arrest. These approaches attempt to predict the

re-offending of particular persons for purposes of service provision and supervision

(Andrews, Bonta & Wormith, 2006). There is an argument, though, regarding the

efficiency of these measures to estimate the re-offending of children, using devices

that were intended to calculate and foresee the actions of adult (Bloom et al., 2003;

Holtfreter & Morash, 2003). Several scholars argue that current measures do not

consider the overall circumstances of children‘s arrests; particularly their

victimization experience, their higher rates of drug offending and lower socio-

economic conditions compared to adult criminals (Holtfreter & Morash, 2003;

McShane et al., 2002).

According to Sampson and Laub (1993), juveniles form strong social bonds

that may lead to attachment with other criminals at jails. They learn from these

criminals and become recidivists due to their strong attachment with other criminals

(Benda, 2005). According to Benda, if juveniles form attachments with friends or peer

groups who are involved in criminal or negative activities, or if their parents are

involved in negative or unlawful activities then there is a high probability that the

child will become involved in criminal activities. It was also found that living in an

urban area, selling of drugs; depression and childhood are connected with recidivism

for juveniles.

There are various factors in a society which lead to crime and recidivism rates.

These include age, migration, ethnicity, poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, peer

group, lack of attachment to parents, law enforcement policies, and most importantly,

the jail life (Ekland-Olson, Kelly & Eisenberg, 1992).

76
 Cusson and Pinsonneault (1986) pointed out that severe punishment or

incarceration produces four different types of reaction in a person:

 Increase of punishment promptsan individual to commit new crimes.

 Increased complexity in coping and acceptance of incarceration, particularly

when prisoners become older.

 Mostly prisoners become frustrated by their lives and decide to become

involved in criminal activities.

 Increased awareness of the weight of previous offending due to the cruelty of

their sentence.

The rehabilitation model proposes that certain troubles experienced by

prisoners, whether social, psychological, or physical, are the cause of their negative

actions. During imprisonment, it is necessary to work with prisoners to solve these

problems (Maltz, 2001).

Clemmer (1940) hypothesized the negative impact of confinement that occurs

during incarceration, happens when inmates learn anti social or negative sub-cultures

from other prisoners. So, the longer offenders live at jail, the recidivism rate will be

greater.

Orsagh and Chen (1988) concluded that social bonds are weaker when a

person is removed for a long time from society. These bonds include familial,

economic, interpersonal and work place. Weakened social bonds with the community

due to incarceration increase an offender‘s tendency to become involved in new

criminal activities after release. Due to longer sentences and loss of contact, the

legitimate way of earning or employment decreases and the illegitimate way of

earning increases after release from prison.

77
 Wheeler (1961) found that attitudes changed among prisoners depending on

the extent of prisonization; commitment to prison norms peaked for those who were

in their middle stage of jail life. New inmates and those who were near to release

demonstrated attitudes that were positive to justice, discipline and crime; they

conformed more to the rules and regulations of society. Furthermore, adjustment

difficulties in the prisoners after release from jail such as rejection by families and

communities may influence the negative behavior again and they may become

recidivists.

In England Walker, Farrington, and Tucker (1981) used data to determine the

reoffending rates of offenders from obtained sample of 2,069 with different types of

sentences. These sentences were immediate imprisonment, suspended sentence, fine,

discharge and probation. The researchers controlled for the effects of felony age, type,

length of sentence, and previous convictions. Studies showed that reoffending rates

diverged according to the preceding convictions of the prisoners. The reoffending

rates were high in all types of sentences with five or more than five convictions.

Probation was less successful for those with five or more incarcerations. Reducing the

recidivism rate was more effective for those offenders with 1-4 preceding convictions.

Wheeler and Hissong (1988) stated that to reduce recidivism, probation was

better than fines and prison. While the results were not decisive due to unrestrained

factors which may have prejudiced trial as well as prisoner self-selection, they

identified that probation might act as a deterrent; more effectively preventing new

offenses than a comparatively brief prison experience.

Cohen et al. (1991) conducted a study in Israel of 202 serious offenders.

According to them, the investigation officer granted probation to 48 percent of

78
offenders and the remaining 52 percent offenders were sent to jails. After a time,

frame of five years, the recidivism rate was 60 percent after releasing offenders from

jail and 55.7 percent of completion of probation offenders. They concluded from the

high rates of recidivism of both groups that neither probation nor jail was a good way

of reducing recidivism.

The need for social reintegration of children who are deprived of their freedom

should be prioritized. They should receive care, protection, education, and

psychological, medical and vocational services that they may require according to

their sex, age and personality. Assessment should be provided to every delinquent

child for their personal conditions. It is necessary to evaluate the interventions taken

for their conditions/personality development to determine whether these interventions

can make a positive change in their behavior or not inorder to reintegrate them into

society (Scott & Steinberg, 2008).

Defining and Measuring Recidivism

Recidivism ―refers to a person‘s relapse into criminal behavior, often after the

person receives sanctions or undergoes intervention for a previous crime‖ (Maltz,

2001). Recidivist actions can provide policymakers with information about the threat

to community protection posed by prisoners, and the success of security initiatives in

(1) rehabilitating and (2) deterring crime. Recidivism procedures are used by many

security agencies to evaluate their performance and to take actions to prioritize such

issues as offender supervision in society, prisoner categorization and programming,

and pretrial detention (Maltz, 2001).

Reoffending policies are different from country to country and from society to

society. The policies regarding prisoners depends on available programs in and out of

79
jail that depend on various factors such as allocation of funds for social programs, the

number of NGO organizations, as well as religious organizations functioning within

the community (Caudill, 2009).

Factors Promoting Recidivism

Juveniles usually become involved in delinquent activities and reoffend due to

poverty. This is due to low wage jobs and unemployment within their families.

Financially unstable family members may get caught upon criminal activities

(Birckhead, 2012). Different reports show that most of the delinquents who become

involved in criminal activities have some sort of relationship with adult criminals.

Some criminals have large households which are living in the Industrial School in

Karachi. The children of these families feel the burden of the financial problems for

their family, in an attempt to help they engage in negative activities and commit

crimes to support their families; moreover, they also support their own needs such like

drugs (Abrar, Baloch & Ghouri, 2010).

Low income juveniles and youth who engage in negative activities and

commit crimes may become recidivists due to peer pressure and their socio-economic

status (Patterson, Dishion & Yoerger, 2000). Due to lack of role models during their

socialization, peer group pressure these young offenders to start looking up to their

leaders (Steinberg, 1987). Sometime these offenders are targeted by gangs due to their

deviant labeling. There is a sense of deprivation, a sense of mistrust towards their

authorities and low self-esteem, so they find gangs as a refuge where they are

accepted. It is simple to involve them in negative activities particularly in crimes like

car thefts which they normally do not commit (Bernburg, Krohn & Rivera, 2006).

80
 Extensive research has been conducted to investigate recidivism due to the

failure of legal system. This includes the juvenile system and arresting authorities

who create more chances for juveniles reoffending or recidivism. This is because

recidivism is often determined as a measure of evaluating the efficiency of the legal

system (Cunneen & Luke, 2011). Recidivism isa major problem which exists in both

developing and developed countries. Due to deviant labeling ofthe previously juvenile

offenders when accused there is more chance of false charge made by the arresting

authorities to make their duty easier (Bernburg et al., 2006).

Kazmi et al. (2013) interviewed re-offenders and lawyers and showed that

three factors are the major cause of recidivism: peer pressure, a flawed legal system,

and low income. Further their analysis revealed that no one factor alone is responsible

for recidivism, but all together are responsible for recidivism. There is a correlation

between all three variables for reoffending of juveniles, no one factor is fully

responsible.

Adult jails act as universities that enable inmates to learn negative activities

and crimes; juvenile prisons may be regarded as small universities of learning crimes.

When they are released from jails they may become professional criminals (SPARC,

2006).

2.7.3 Psychological Well-being of Juveniles

Juveniles face huge problems adjusting to their lives in prison due to their

abnormal behavior before their arrest (Zamble & Porporino, 1990). The adjustment of

prison life is a long process which leaves many prisoners unable to bear such a painful

period during their incarceration (Sykes, 1958). The prisoners are deprived of

81
autonomy, liberty, security, relationships, goods and services. The most painful thing

for the prisoners is the loss of their liberty and autonomy. The restriction of freedom

of movement of prisoners is also a big problem for them. It is very clear from

different studies that the psychological tension in prisoner‘s lives is produced due to

the lack of liberty (Wright, 1993).

Wooldredge (1999) showed that psychological problems of prisoners are due to

stress on inmates, tension, anxiety, frustration, low self-esteem, marginalization and

anger. The empirical research found that many prisoners who return to the free world

are suffering from psychological disorders (Haney, 1997). Still some researchers doubt

whether psychological disorder in imprisonment is due to the painful conditions in

prisons. However most of the researchers are agreed that psychological disorders in

prison aredue to extreme, harsh, dangerous, or the otherwise psychologically-taxing

nature of the imprisonment (Bonta & Gendreau, 1990).

Institutionalization of Juvenile Prisoners

Compared to clinically-diagnoses, the institutionalization of prisoners on a

routine basis is the most powerful tool to improve their psychological disorder.

Institutionalization is a process by which the behaviors of prisoners are changed by

the institutional environments. Institutionalization is called prisonization when it

occurs in correctional setting which is found to be the most effective method to

improve the psychological abnormality (Haney, 1997).

Inmates’ Well-Being

Wooldredge (1999) mentions that the oppressive state of jail is strongly

associated with the psychological well-being of inmates and causes negative

psychological effects like depression and isolation. But such kinds of psychological

disorder largely depend on the needs of inmates (Toch, 1977).

82
Impact of Imprisonment on Juveniles

Depression and Anxiety

Inmates show a greater level of nervousness and sadness than the common

population, along with low level of self-esteem among specific groups of prisoners.

This explains that different rehabilitative programs must be required to support the

self-esteem of the inmate. Moreover, the fear of oppression in inmates shows that the

jail atmosphere can lead to hyper-vigilance. Hyper-vigilance is the ―sustained

heightened cognitive and affective arousal in the service of scanning the environment

for threats‖ (Boxer et al., 2009, p. 4).

Imprisonment is so negative for some inmates that it can cause severe

psychological problems such as traumatic stress. A ―risk factors‖ model helps to

clarify the relationship of traumatic childhood actions such as insulting language,

poverty, avoidance by family, and oppression in the life of many prisoners. Masten

and Garmezy (1985) noted that the existence of trauma and these risk factors in early

childhood increases the possibility that a person will encounter problems later in life

like criminal behavior. Different researchers have revealed that prisoners show greater

levels of psychological disorder than non-prisoners and have lower levels of self-

esteem (Castellano & Soderstrom, 1997).

Suicide

According to Towl (2003), 10% of prisoners commit suicide within 24 hours

of their arrival at jail. During 1978 to 2003 in England the suicide rate of male

inmates was about five times more than common male population. Deprivation theory

shows that ―prisons in which inmates experience a greater loss of freedom, have lesser

83
control over daily routines, and are denied access to rehabilitative programs will have

a higher incidence of suicide‖ (McNulty & Huey, 2005, p. 4). Moreover, other factors

lead a prisoner to commit suicide when they face incarceration. Problems that compel

inmates to commit suicide include loss of mobilization, use of drugs, mental disorder

and shame (Hayes & Blaauw, 1997).

Coping Strategies

Limited research explores how inmates handle the pains of incarceration.

Research on prison situations shows that in order to eliminate negative impacts of

punishment or violence on the juvenile inmates, encouraging the formation of social

bonds and providing social support is necessary for their well-being. Firstly, the

delinquent must adjust to the new environment; secondly, he/she must interact with

other delinquents and staff; and lastly, he/she must adjust mentally (Hochstetler et al.,

2010).

Hayes and Blaauw (1997) suggest that there are many factors which can

negatively affect those who are imprisoned. Some features of jail can negatively

affect the adjustment of inmates to incarceration. These involve: terror, mistrust of jail

staff, separation from their family members, the humiliation of incarceration and the

negative effects of confinement.

Other researchers have found that those prisoners, who are new to jail, but

serve long prison terms, experience the most strain. Those prisoners who received

lengthier sentences suffered from more psychological stress, as compared to those

who serveda short time in prison (MacKenzie & Goodstein, 1985).

84
 Gender seems to be an important factor that influences how individuals handle

incarceration. Furthermore, when male inmates do not express their personal feelings,

they suffer more stress. This stress can lead to more aggression as a method of coping.

This style can make male inmates more dominant on other prisoners (Clements,

1979). Though, some studies have revealed that structural features of incarceration are

less predictive of mental health ways in which male prisoners handle jail life (Bonta

& Gendreau, 1990).

Prison Adjustment refers to the ―psychological processes through which

people manage or cope with the demands or challenges of everyday life‖ (Dye, 2010,

p. 9). Social loneliness practice by male prisoners is the key factor which influences

their adjustment to incarceration. Other research has shown that separation of the

offender from their families is the main reason for attempting suicide at jail (Kupers,

1999). Yet other studies found that regular visits by the family members and friends

have a positive influence on adjustment at jail (Cobean & Power, 1978). Also, male

prisoners appear to become more adjusted to incarceration when they are permitted

some measure of control over their surroundings, suggesting that lower security

jailsare necessary for healthy adjustment with other male inmates (McNulty & Huey,

2005).

Toxic prison conditions are characterized by aggression, tension, depression,

anxiety, and suicide (Dye, 2010). One main sign of poor adjustment of prisoners is

high rates of disciplinary infractions. Mc Shane, Williams & Dolney (2002) determine

six concepts of adjustment: disciplinary history, work history, security classification,

earning ability, assignment stability and outside contact.

The negative results of imprisonment on the personality of inmates have been

under researched part of jail population. There are different universal problems in jails

85
such as conflict in inmates, lack of facilities, psychological and physical problems and

over-crowdedness (Prakash et al., 2007).

Prisoners are more vulnerable to poor health due to number of factors. Those

prisoners who have committed crimes like rape, murder, and theft are punished by the

court and sent to jails for a long time. When they enter the jail environment they know

that after family they have to spend lot of time here in jail with these inmates so they

share happiness, their secrets, they provided support to each other, they made

company and friendship with each other because they cut off from their social life and

join new way of life in jail, so for adjustment and time passing they made relationship

with other inmates. This loneliness leaves a negative effect on male prisoners

(Mackenzie & Goldstein, 1985).

Lack of basic facilities such as proper diets, and conflict and violence among

the prisoners affects their health. Moreover, prisoners worry about their futures

because of the social they could experience. Feelings of insecurity, anxiety, and

embarrassment contribute to inmates‘ poor health (Levenson & Cotter, 2005).

Researchers have different views about the negative effects of incarceration on

the personality of inmates, but most of researchers agreed on the psychological impact

of imprisonment; they state that delinquents face numerous problems in the early days

of their sentences (Sapsford, 1978).

Psychological well-being is subjective in nature. Well-beingincludes feeling of

pleasure, fulfillment of basic needs and support in various aspects of life. Some

people face unfavorable conditions in their life but feel happy because of their

positive attitude towards life. Well-being can be understood in psychological, physical

and emotional terms. In 1948 the World Health Organization (WHO) defined health

86
as "a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the

absence of disease or infirmity" (Prakash et al., 2015, p. 21).

Well-being is a perception which is derived from psychology. Positive

psychology studies how people flourish. Well-being is expressed in terms of kindness

in assorted aspects of life such as the capability to handle difficult conditions, feelings

of attraction towards others, and the ability to take pleasure in life (Singh & Shyam,

2007).

Hence, the main purpose of ensuring well-being is achieving the aim of

WHO‘s mandate, ―healthy mind in a healthy body in a healthy environment‖ (Shri,

2007, p. 7). Absence of proper diets affects prisoners‘ physical health, leads to fights,

aggression, and conflict between groups or gangs of prisoners which affects their

well-being (Dye, 2010).

Effective Measures for Psychological Well-being

Providing a more amenable environment and suitable conditions for prisoners

at jail may reduce the negative psychological effects of imprisonment such as anxiety,

tension, alienation and other psychological problems. There are some factors which

have positive impacts on psychological well-being of prisoners such as social

integration and not being victimized (Wooldredge, 1999). Boxer et al. (2009) found

that experiences of aggression in jail were considerably linked with emotional stress.

2.7.4 Sexual Violence

Definition of sexual abuse

Sexual abuse of a juvenile in confinement includes both physical and non-

physical behaviors. In the cases of juveniles‘ sexual abuse and staff sexual

87
misconduct, friendly actions can lead sexual abuse. The restriction of friendly

behavior with offenders such as exchanging of pictures and letters between juveniles

and with staff is a matter of procedure (U.S. Department of Justice, 2013).

The US Congress confirmed the responsibility to keep imprisoned persons

from sexual abuse by enacting the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) of 2003,

―The rape of an inmate is defined as sex beyond consent of an inmate

incarcerated or detained in any crime who is accused of, convicted of,

sentenced for, or adjudicated delinquent for violations of criminal law or the

terms and conditions of parole, probation, pretrial release, or diversionary pro-

grams in the actual or constructive control of prison officials‖ (The Prison

Rape Elimination Act (PREA), 2003).

The Act required the foundation of a national commission to comprehend the

causes and results of sexual mis handle in internment and to create standards for

restorative offices country wide that would set in real life a procedure once thought to

be in conceivable: the disposal of jail assault. According to the National Prison Rape

Elimination Commission (NPREC) report, juveniles in imprisonment are substantially

more likely than incarcerated grown-ups to be sexually mishandled, and they are

especially in danger when kept with grown-ups. To be powerful, sexual mishandle

anticipation, investigation, and treatment must be customized to the formative limits

and needs of youth (National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Report, 2009).

The Bureau of Justice Statistics of America (BJS) defines sexual abuse as:

Sexual contact with any person without his or her consent, or with a man who can't

consent or can't. The most real scenes, non-consensual sexual acts, include: contact

between the penis and the vagina or the penis and the backside including passageway,

88
regardless, slight: or contact between the mouth and the penis, vagina or butt; or

invasion of the butt-driven or genital opening of another person by a hand, finger or

other inquiry (Beck, Adams & Guerino, 2008).

In 2005-2006, BJS collected data from juvenile correctional authorities and

noted that each year in juvenile facilities more than 2,000 sexual abuse cases reported.

Fifty-seven percent cases reported juvenile on juvenile sexual violence and forty three

percent reported abuses from staff (Beck et al., 2008).

In the United States there are more than seven million prisoners in which most

of the inmates sexually abused and they feel insecure in prison (Glaze & Parks, 2012).

Sexual abuse in confinement is a major issue and creates more problems for jail staff,

authorities and for prisoners (National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, 2009).

Jaillife explains sexual violence by its perspective. An act of sexual violence

in one situation may be understood in another context to be an act of coming out of

the closet and in still another context interpreted as rape. Jail life analyzes the sexual

violence of the children and the future impacts over their life by their own

perspective. At jail life, it is mandatory to aware the children about the sexual abuse

and avoid rape from others. For the juvenile prisoners it is necessary that they should

be powerful and physically strong to depend their self, and if it happens, this sex will

be the consent of the victim (Pinkerton, Galletly & Seal, 2007).

Studies have shown that in all-male facilities, sexual violence occurs more

frequently than the data would suggest. Individuals convicted of sex crimes,

particularly against minors, those recognized as ‗snitches,‘ and those who are

professed as having challenged a more influential inmate can be subject to cruel and

sexually violent attacks with several assailants (Pinkerton et al., 2007).

89
Sexually Victimized Juveniles in Prison

There is a ―boys don‘t cry‖ tradition that exists in all-male jails. The strong

prisoner is a ‗real man‘ who does not share anything with others and lives a tough life.

This unique life of jail is different from the entire society where sympathy exists and

ever one can take care of an individual but in jail everyone is in chance for sexual

activity. Some detainees defend themselves from rape but due to certain physical and

mental weaknesses others may be sexually exploited (Martyniuk, 2014).

Unequal Risk and Victimization

Children and youth lack experience of jail life; they are at risk of sexual abuse

by other prisoners at jail. Mental illness and physical disabilities can affect a

prisoner‘s ability to function and remain safe at jail. Inmates who have severe

disabilities such as physical or mental illness are prone to sexual violence. Inmates

with diseases who are not receiving treatment have a high risk of serious mental

illness. When diseases in prisoners‘manifest in paranoia, hallucinations, depression

and anxiety, it becomes difficult for them to build social networks among prisoners in

order to protect themselves from sexual violence. Furthermore, the treatment provided

to prisoners often has some side effects, like slowed reactions, sleepiness,

unrestrained actions and threat (National Prison Rape Elimination Commission,

2009).

In addition to juvenile inmates, sexual abuse of lesbian, gay, bisexual,

transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) prisoners represent one of the highest rates of

discrimination at jail. A study conducted by the California Department of Corrections

and Rehabilitation at six men‘s prisons of California, found that 67% of prisoners who

identified as LGBTQ reported sexual attack by other prisoner during imprisonment;

90
this study showed that the rate is 15 times more than the rate of the overall inmate

population (Jenness et al., 2007).

When juveniles are imprisoned with adult prisoners, adults sexually abuse

juveniles 5 times more than juveniles imprisoned with other juveniles (Forst, Fagan &

Vivona, 1989). The aftermath of sexual assault is devastating and invasive; it affects

the person spiritually, emotionally, physically and socially. Sexual persecution causes

mental problems from a condition which cannot be circumvented, and for which an

individual cannot use their resources to solve their normal problem (Burgess &

Holmstrom, 1974).

Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD)

Powelson and Fletcher (2000) noted that some sexually transmitted diseases

are present in imprisoned populations. The Raid Plasma Reagent test is a blood test

used to identify syphilis, however because it involves a blood draw, some prisoners

are unwilling to undergo the test. The Ligase Chain Reaction test used to test for

Chlamydia and gonorrhea is a urine test which is less invasive. Because prisoners tend

to have higher risk life styles and behaviors, preventative sexually transmitted disease

testing and cures are very important (Widom & Hammett, 1996).

Juveniles in US

In general data about prison rape is meager, and the pervasiveness rate of

sexual cruelty in juveniles is mainly under-researched. In 2005-2006 Bureau of

Justice Statistics (BJS) reported about 4,000 sexual cases to juvenile corrections

authorities and forwarded allegations of 17 sexual cases per 1000 juveniles at jails. In

2005 BJS found that young prisoners in adult jails are also at high risk to sexual

violence (Beck et al., 2008).

91
 Juvenile survivors of sexual assault at jail face numerous hurdles in reporting

their sexual abuse case and risk further sexual attacks and stigma from society.

Furthermore, juvenile inmates have less access to judges, lawyers and other people

related to law when they are imprisoned in exclusive jails as compared to juveniles

incarcerated in adult jails (Just Detention International, [JDI], 2009).

The Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act prohibit incarcerating

juveniles with adults in same jail except in limited situations; this type of security

does not apply to young prisoners who are incarcerated as adult inmates. According to

Just Detention International (JDI), juveniles should not be imprisoned with adults and

should not be tried in the criminal justice system like adult inmates (Hartney, 2006).

Sexual offenders

After their release from jail, sex offenders face numerous problems in society

such as: fears associated with sex offending, stigma, difficulty finding employment,

securing housing and other problems. In some societies where people must notify

their communities and register as sex offenders, the hurdle to successful re-entry can

be significant. After release of a prisoner specialized planning, training, assistance and

supervision should be required. Prisoners who involve in sexual activities depend on

their background, surrounding, motivation, risk of recidivism and types crimes

(Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004).

More risky sex offenders should have the longest and strictest period of care.

Some factors related to recidivism include criminality, lifestyle instability and sexual

deviancy (Hanson & Morton-Bourgon, 2004). Specific terms, rules, conditions and

specialized supervision are often required for each offender (Center for Sex Offender

92
Management [CSOM], 2008). Communities‘ negative response is the basic factor for

some offenders to avoid returning to their community. Therefore, community

awareness and education are the essential factors to a successful reintegration and

adjustment of the offenders (McAlinden, 2006).

Sexual Violence in Philippines’ Detention Centers

The sexual violence of offenders is an often-unnoticed aspect of the torment

and ill action that occurs in detention centers. The Commission on Human Rights of

the Philippines (CHR), the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG),

and human rights advocatesAmnesty International has highlighted cases of sexual

violence in Philippine jails. Based on this information and on unreliable evidence,

observers have the same opinion that inmate rape is extensive in the jails and

constitutes an urgent human rights concern (Jabeen, 2013).

Rape at jails committed by other prisoners or jail staff is internationally

considered to be torture. Other types of sexual harassment and violence at jail may

constitute inhuman treatment, cruel, punishment in these cases also violates the

Convention Against Torture (Convention Against Torture, 1986). Due to systemic

failure there is no safety for detainees against sexual violence at jails. Sufferers of

prisoner rape are often left bloodied and beaten, suffer severe psychological harm and

may contact HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. Once released from jail they

return to society with emotional and physical scars (JDI, 2009).

Sexual Abuse in Pakistani Jails

In April 11, 1999, a disturbance by juveniles in the facilities of Punjab

Sahiwal Central jail severely shed light on the sexual abuse of juvenile prisoners by

jail staff as well as the lack of a useful complaint mechanism. The occasion was set

93
off when a thirteen-year-old boy, Aslam, complained of sexual abuse by the head

warden, Zulfiqar. While the jail staff did not allow Aslam to meet the jail

superintendent, during visits other boys at the jail informed their parents about the

case. The parents of other boys then informed the legal aid lawyer of Sahiwal Syed,

Alamdar Hussain Shah. Alamdar Hussain Shah gained permission from the inspector-

general of prisons (IGP) of Punjab to visit the jail, but the jail superintendent did not

allow him to meet with any of juvenile prisoners in the jail (Parekh, 1999).

The prison staff‘s blunt reprisal against Aslam set off an aggressive response

from other juvenile inmates. According to a local journalist, the boys then broke the

walls of the jail and also set fire tothe furniture. The insurgence was soon stopped by

the Frontier Constabulary, who had been summoned by the jail staff. In this conflict

some juveniles were injured six injuries were reportedly serious and these inmates

were shifted to the hospital for three weeks (Parekh, 1999).

On April 13, the deputy inspector-general of prisons, Captain Sarfraz Mufti,

visited the jail and ordered the suspension of Abdullah, a warden, Zulfiqar, Malik Ijaz

an assistant superintendent and criminal cases were registered against ten juveniles

who had rioted and damaged jail property (Parekh, 1999).

2.7.5 Health

Health Problems of Prisoners in Europe and Asian Countries

Tuberculosis (TB) and HIV are common among prisoners throughout the

world. In European countries infectious diseases like STD, HIV, Tuberculosis and

hepatitis B and C, are very common among prisoners as compared to the general

community. In 2010 tuberculosis and other infectious diseases, exceeded ten percent

in three European countries and the relative risk of tuberculosis is expected to grow

94
145 times greater in prisons than in the community (European Centre for Disease

Prevention and Control and World Health Organization Europe, 2013).

The World Health Organization in 2014 reported that in European countries,

those people who are sex workers, drug addicts, prisoners and migrants are most often

affected by infectious diseases. WHO reported in 2014 that some of their laws, policies

and regulation are considered a hurdle in the way of preventing effective HIV treatment

and support in vulnerable population particularly at jails (Enggist et al., 2014).

In Europe higher level of poor mental health have been found among prisoners

at jails than in other communities due to conditions in jails such as, overcrowding,

violence, isolation, lack of privacy and inadequate health facilities, especially mental

health services. According to UNODC, worldwide the suicide rates in prisoners are

ten times higher than the general population. This problem is more frequent in

European jails than the rest of the world with an average of 62 per 100,000 and

accounts for over 13 per cent of all deaths in prisons due to lack of mental health

services (Durcan & Zwemstra, 2014).

The CRC is crucial for the protection of young people and children‘s well-being

in all spheres of life. Special consideration for imprisoned children and young is given

in the CRC in article 40 which particularly deals with juvenile justice, and article 25

deals with the care of those children who are under custody. All the other provisions of

this convention can also apply to children who are at jails. Children and adolescents

often have poor health as compared to adults therefore extra ordinary attention should

be paid to their health in the environment of jails. It is difficult to recognize the

psychological needs of juveniles in prison because the emotional and psychological

95
state of mind of children is different than that of adults; even their cognition capacity is

not the same asthat of a mature adult (Durcan & Zwemstra, 2014).

The National Mental Health Commission advisor, Professor Allan, determined

that prison in Australia had become a ―Dumping Ground‖ for mentally ill prisoners.

The Commission in Australia also reports that prisons have become a "dumping

ground" costing billions of tax payer dollars per year. He further said that 28 percent

of the 29,000 people at jails have mental illness and one out of three prisoners has

been in prison for five times or more due to mental health (Davidson, 2016).

The majority of prisoners face mental health problems and these problems

may occur due to substance abuse or physical disability. Research on jail-based

psychological health care approaches indicates that mental health programs in prison

can minimize recidivism in prisoners. Curriculum based treatment programs that

focus on problem solving, goal setting, improving cognitive skills and managing

stress and fear was found to have positive effects on recidivism (Peters, 2015).

Poor mental health is present to great extent in developed countries among

prisoners. For example, in the United Kingdom 90% of prisoners aged above 16 years

are affected with poor mental health, personality disorder and addiction, and 70%

prisoners had two or more such problems (Singleton, Meltzer & Gatward, 1998).

Addiction problems are much higher in inmates than in the general population.

In the United Kingdom about 10 to 15 percent of prisoners suffer from mental health

illnesses such as autism and bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. Young people in

prison often suffer from a mental health disorder, including conduct disorder (Fazel,

Doll and Langstrom, 2008). Among prisoners, young girls with depression as a

mental health disease in most developed countries the risk of suicide is higher in

prisoners (Fazel et al., 2005).

96
Healthcare in Prisons

The Australian government provides significant and constant health needs to

prisoners and the general population. But the way in which health services are

delivered in prisons is different across the country. Prisoners do not have access to

Medicare, which provides access to free health services by the Australian

Government. Prisoners do not have the choice of a medical provider, nor may they

contact an alternative medical provider. They do not have access to quality and

comprehensive mental health care, easy access to family and social support to lower

the damage of seclusion. The Australian government also does not provide injections

or other medical equipment for the treatment of inmates who are addicted to drugs

(Health & Welfare, 2012).

Medical Care of Prisoners

World wide, basic medical treatment is not provided to prisoners in jails. For

example, specialist doctors like medical specialists, dentists, gynecologists and

psychologists are not present in most jails. In detention centers language is also a

major problem; some prisoners have difficulty conveying their problems to the

medical officer. In some jails only, pain killers are provided to inmates whatever their

problems (Jesuit Refugee Service, 2010).

Physical Health of Prisoners in Jails

In detention centers patients relatively have good physical health. Some do

have asthma, chronic pains and medical illness. The lack of fresh air, living in small

space and stress associated with confinement all carry injurious physical health

effects. Younger inmates and women up to the age of 24 years have more physical

health problems than adult male inmates (Jesuit Refugee Service, 2010).

97
The Impact of Jail on the Prisoner

Numerous prisoners express their disappointment over the poor availability of

food in jails. Generally, the food provided to inmates is very poor; it is against human

rights to cause hunger, but loss of weight is common in jails. When directly asked,

most prisoners do not confess to having special needs, but they point out the needs

and problems of the other prisoners (Jesuit Refugee Service, 2010).

On the medical side the allocation of the doctors to jails is very low. Like

much of society, most doctors not like prison duty. For the sake of prisoners, jail staff

and doctors have extra motivation from the management side to choose this job.

Furthermore, doctors who treat prisoners have no special training and they are not

fully free to take care of the prisoners (Jesuit Refugee Service, 2010).

Health and medical care in Pakistani prisons is the most ignored subject in our

prisons. HIV diseases are more frequently found in prisoners in Pakistani prisons.

Approximately 87,000 prisoners are HIV positive. In Pakistani jails 110 prisoners are

freed daily and they have HCV, HBV, TB, or AIDS/HIV. These prisoners are

released without any health awareness or medical treatment. They are also not

followed for medical treatment in outside world and become a high risk for their

partners, families and communities. Through this way the incongruous environment

of prisons spreads diseases in the society (Ziauddin, 2015).

Healthcare

Medical care at jail is essential for a variety of causes. Studies shows that the

rates of infectious diseases in prison are much higher than in the free society.

Overcrowding and poor living conditions, distinctive for many prisons, also

contribute to this situation. Medical health care in prisons is also directly linked to

public health in general (Durcan & Zwemstra, 2014).

98
Medical Staff

Adequate and suitably trained medical staff is a key requirement for the

successful delivery of health services to prisoners. Insufficient medical staff results in

delayed or poor-quality services, which could have a serious impact on prisoners‘

health. At the same time, many prisons face serious problems in hiring medical staff

due to the difficult working environment in prisons and, in some countries, the low

level of wages. Most international legal tools pay special attention to the medical staff

in prison, including their professional behavior and ethics, training and skills. At the

same time, there is little tangible provision in terms of the most suitable number of

professionals (Kelk, 1999).

According to the United Nations, the services of at least one skilled medical

doctor/officer who has some understanding of psychotherapy must be available at every

prison. The United Nations recommends that in prisons where medical staff or doctors

are on duty in jail premises, at least one should be present at all times in case of

emergency. In smaller prisons, the medical doctor/officer should be located near the

prison, so they can easily return to deal with urgent medical situations (OHCHR, 1989).

Focusing on the potential harm to juvenile at prisons, some of the jail officers

keep them away from adults. This is not a permanent or adequate solution to separate

juveniles from adults due to emotional and physical harm. Juveniles are often

confined in small cells without any type of artificial light. These types of situations

increase tension, frustration, anxiety, psychological problems and in the most

dangerous scenario--they try to commit suicide. It is observed that juveniles have high

ratio of committing suicide at jails. Furthermore, it is observed that juveniles are

nineteen times more likely to commit suicide than people outside jail and thirty-six

times more to commit suicide in adult jails than from juvenile jails (Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention, 2007).

99
 The U.N. Tenets for the Protection of Juveniles requires adequate preventive

and therapeutic psychological well-being care, including mental, dental human

services, quick access to satisfactory medicinal offices and ophthalmological

hardware (U.N. Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, Rule

49, 1990). According to the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules, there should be

minimum one qualified and specialist doctor/officer for the treatment of juveniles at

the jails (U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, s. 22(1),

1990). Furthermore, if jails have hospital facilities there should be more quality

equipment, drugs and furnishings and a properly qualified staff (U.N. Standard

Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, s. 22(2), 1990). According to the

prison rules of Pakistan in every jail there should be one hospital, medical doctor,

junior medical doctor and nurse (Parekh, 1999).

2.7.6 Education

Historical Background of Juvenile in Prisons

The architects started a school in Walnut Street Jail in Philadelphia in 1798 as

―the most helpful for learning of minor criminal and improving for others in the first

principles of reading, writing, and arithmetic‖ (Coley & Barton, 2006). Barnes and

Teeters report that Caleb Lowness, Philadelphia reformer, in 1798 "urged that a

school be opened in the Walnut Street Jail, but there is no evidence that it was done".

In 1801, in New York state that "basic education was given to 'meritorious convicts'

during the winter months by the better educated convicts‖. In 1823 the records of

Massachusetts State Prison report that a school attended by about 60 minor convicts

had been getting better education. In the 1820s formal schools were established in

American prisons. However, informal education was begun soon after the law of

1790. Taft explains that in 1825 onward secular education had its start in the juvenile

institutions (Barnes & Teeters, 1951). After that, education has been developed

100
throughout US prison system, and contributed tothe disagreement about rehabilitation

versus punishment. In the beginning of the 1820s, Samuel Hopkins argued that

―inmate life had not been sufficiently severe and should produce more terror and

suffering.‖ Such views gave rise to the Auburn, N.Y., system, which believedthat ―too

much faith had been placed in the convict‘s reform's ability‖. Thus, little attention was

paid to education in the Auburn system. In 1980s and 1990s, very little of the budget

was spent by the government for education in correctional facilities. Due to budget

problems, incarcerated youth in U.S. states such as Illinois, Florida and California

jails are deprived of education. Today, due to budget problems, youth in detention in

states such as California, Florida, and Illinois are deprived of correctional education.

Congress passed a law in 1994 at the federal level that forbids inmates from receiving

Pell Grants, and also hampers effective funding for post-secondary education in

prisons (Silva, 1994).

Trends in Educational Services in Prisons

The population of young inmates at jail has been increasing day by day. In

1985, about 72,000 juveniles were imprisoned. By 2004, 100,000 youths were

imprisoned every year in the U.S. Though, educational facilities in imprisonment do

not fulfill the need of prisoners, in spite of the reality that education plays a vital role

in minimizing the recidivism rate and play a pivotal role in reintegration of the

prisoners (Thielbar, 2011).

Availability of Educational Program in U.S

Different research studies show the percentages of educational services

separately at federal and state level. According to this study, 89 percent of all

institutions provide various types of education programs. The majority of these

institutions provided 76 percent of basic education, 80 percent of secondary education

and 54 percent of professional training (Coley & Barton, 2006).

101
Educational Services at jails

It is the basic right of inmates to receive education by the state. In 1840,

Rhode Island was the first state which made education compulsory in the law. In

1918, every state in U.S had made its own compulsory education law (Yell, 1998).

These compulsory education laws were also included in the state constitutions. But

this requires state legislatures to ensure free education for all juveniles in jails. In

addition to state laws, the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) clearly

mandated that states must check the federal education fund and improve education in

jails. The ―Adequate Yearly Progress‖ mandated by the NCLBA applies to all

children and juvenile populations who are in detention. Juvenile detention centers are

facing many problems in the education system; these institutions do not fulfill the

basic requirements of education services to facilitate the education of juvenile

prisoners (Twomey, 2008).

To provide quality education to juvenile prisoners, classrooms, libraries, books

and well-trained teachers are very important. However, the state does not provide

these facilities to juvenile prisoners and is unable to fulfill requirements of the

NCLBA (Twomey, 2008). These problems are actually raised due to the lack of

coordination between correctional schools and public schools. This lack of

coordination produces a gap between students of correctional education and public

schools and can have long-term effects on the children‘s education. The educational

program for juvenile prisoners is incompatible because of the isolation of correctional

educational programs from the public education system. The lack of information

between schools and correctional facilities because of the incompatibilities produces a

gap between these institutions. Due to the lack of facilities in correctional institutions,

few juveniles enroll in public schools after their release. According to research, only

102
12% imprisoned juveniles out of 759 have completed their high school education after

their release from jails (Bullis, 2004).

It is the basic responsibility of the government to provide education service in

detention centers, as education has been constantly connected with reducing

recidivism. Furthermore, those children who received basic education in

imprisonment are more likely to go back to school after their release from jail.

Education in imprisonment centers can have communal benefits as well. The Alliance

of Juvenile Justice estimates that about 2 million dollars are saved for each juvenile

who is rehabilitated in imprisonment and does not commit future crimes. Programs

that have been started for juvenile offenders are more effective in imprisonment

concentrate on low student-to-teacher ratios that highlight the literacy level of

juveniles (Twomey, 2008).

The importance of education is increasing in order to get job in this modern

and competitive world. Because most inmates lack education to prepare them for a job

after their release from jail, some jails started various educational programs such as

adult basic education (ABE), high school education, secondary or post-secondary

programs, and vocational training (James, 2015).

Post-Secondary Education and Recidivism

Research studies on educational institutions for prisoners show that continued

education after release from jail was strongly related to reductions in the recidivism

rate. Studies show that participants in ABE were not as likely to recidivate as

compared to those who did not participate in education after release from jails.

Nevertheless, it is not easy to measure the effectiveness of the program because of the

limited material available to drawany ultimate conclusions. Most research studies

103
focus on vocational training or education for inmates, but the result was mixed from

these research studies. The research studies on vocational education show that the

superiority of vocational education may play an important role in reducing the

recidivism rate (James, 2015).

The Government of Uganda introduced universal primary education in

January 1997 and universal secondary education was introduced in 2005, but

universal education remains in its immature stage and does not cover all parts of the

country. The universal primary education is not in the position to help the poor and

needy people due to lack of funds for uniform education (Kalibala & Elson, 2010).

The government focuses on those education programs that were originally

provided in the remand homes. However, according to Commissioner for Youth and

Children, operational education programs for juvenile inmates in remand homes is not

easy because inhabitants come and go frequently at different times: one individual may

have finished up in Primary level, while others may have never been to school, some

maybe familiar with reading and writing and others don‘t know at all (Moore, 2010).

Religious Education in Prisons

The Ugandan government provides religious education to remand houses up to

some extent. In Fort Portal, Uganda, a religious ceremony will be held by warden and

visiting Church groups on Sundays. In Gulu, Uganda there is Bible teaching every

Tuesday and Friday to the inmates, so that prisoner has more access to a religious

representative. In Niagara, Uganda, Christian organization was running spiritual and

educational programs for juvenile prisoners on a daily basis. In Kampiringisia there

were four NGOs that are working for the spiritual development of the young people

(Moore, 2010).

104
Education and Training Capacity

Education plays a very important role in rehabilitation of offenders. According

to the Council of Europe, education in prison is a way to civilize prisoners and to

improve the living conditions of prisoners is also an important way of facilitating the

return of the prisoner to society. Therefore, educational institutions must play a

positive role in the juvenile‘s return to society (Markov & Doichinova, 2015).

Access to education is the basic right according to the treatment of inmates

adopted by the U.N. The United Nations also stresses that provisions should be made

for further education of all prisoners with a special focus on illiterate and young

prisoners for whom education should be obligatory. It is further suggested that

education of inmates should be incorporated in a similar manner to the education

system used in that country. This way, after their release from jail inmates should not

feel difficulty in continuing their education. The quality of education in prison is hard

to assess in a comparative way due to dissimilar educational standards applied by

different countries. The enrollment of inmates in education programs is also not

relevant, because it depends on factors away from the control of the prison

management, such as will of individual inmates and education level, and the duration

of the sentence. Because of that, to assess education in prison, the Prison Conditions

Monitoring Index (PCMI) is used as a primary principle for the evaluation of

educational programs for prisoners (Markov & Doichinova, 2015).

Saudi Arabia has been establishing a reformatory model which includes

educational institutions, farms for the cultivation and herding of all types of livestock,

factories, workshops for vocational training and other facilities or reforms such as

recreation, culture and socialactivities (Penal Reforms International, 2015).

105
2.8 Synthesis of Literature Review
The above literature thoroughly reviewed multiple aspects of the jail

environment and their impacts on the well-being of juveniles. A number of factors of

the jail environment included living conditions, attitude of the jail staff, exclusive jails

(Borstal Institutions for Juveniles), delayed justice system, exclusive juvenile courts,

and the relation of gangsters with juveniles; these issues have been studied in national

and international contexts. The review of literature shows that most of the prison

system of the world faces many problems such as: overcrowding, poor living

conditions in jails, unavailability of services, and cruel and humiliating treatment of

juveniles. Different mechanisms were adopted by some countries to cope with

problems such asthe need for proper laws for prisons, probation and parole services

and Borstal Institutions for juveniles. The effects of the jail environment were studied

under the heading of the well-being of juveniles that was divided further into sub-

variables which include social marginalization, recidivism, psychological well-being,

sexual violence, health and education regarding juvenile prisoners. The literature

shows that negative impacts of incarceration on juveniles prevailed in both

international and national levels although the literature on some of the aspects of the

effects is scarce. On each variable of this study, the researcher has covered the

available literature first on international level with a major focus on the US,

Australian and European prison systems and then studied available literature

regarding Asian countries. Finally, the variables were studied in the local context of

Pakistan. Moreover, the gap between policy making and its implementation was also

examined with the help of available literature.

106
Part-II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.9 Theoretical Framework

2.9.1 Sampson and Laub’s Age-Graded Theory of Informal Social Control and

Cumulative Disadvantage

Sampson and Laub‘s age graded theory (1993, 2005) originated from the

findings of Glueck and Glueck (1950). The theory postulates that informal social

controls arbitrate structural context and explain participation in criminal acts. Crime

or delinquency will be more expected when social bonds to other members of the

community are weakened. Especially, social controls, which come from the social

relations of the general population and foundations at each phase of the life, are

described as a type of social capital. Social capital includes the knowledge, trust

worthiness, sanctions, norms and expectations that these relations produce. In real,

bonds to people create social capital and mutually dependent systems of obligations

that make it too difficult to engage in criminal acts (Sampson & Laub, 1993). The

person garners variable amounts of social capital from informal social control

networks, which explains the continuity in negative behaviors across various stages of

life. Those individuals from the general public who have a criminal record "mortgage"

future life changes. This method is the combined drawback alluded to in the

hypothesis. Grown-up social bonds can serve to "right" before hand adverse pathways

(e.g., adolescent misconduct, substance manhandle, joblessness) and along these lines

put the individual on a course towards effective results. Sampson and Laub clarify

that criminal demonstrations are described by change and dynamism: even the

dynamic criminal stops over the life course, for instance, a 50-60-year-old criminal

isn't dynamic as they were in 17 (Sampson & Laub, 2005).

107
2.9.2 Catalano and Hawkins Social Development Model

Catalano and Hawkins‘ (1996) Social Development Model is based on study

that has included the role of danger and defensive features for criminal actions and

substance use but may also be useful to the onset of other harmful. They argued that

because criminal behavior and drug use are initiated in early childhood, a theoretical

model that looks to explain the preservation, desistence and onset of such acts must

focus on causal processes in early age (Catalano & Hawkins, 1996, p. 150). The

Social Development Model posits that a person learns negative behavior through

socialization from family, peers, school, and community (Catalano & Hawkins,

1996). There must be ample chances for participation in such activities with other

members, followed by the magnitude of participation and interaction occupied in and

experienced by the person. The participation will be influenced by the skills of the

person, and lastly the result of the communication will give strengthening for the

participation.

2.9.3 Labeling Theory

Labeling theory argues that those who commit a crime are stigmatized by

society and the resultant stigma may influence their behavior and personality in turn

(Braithwaite, 1989). Individuals who commit crimes face potential problems when

participating in different social activities due to the stigma on his/her personality.

These types of people are not accepted by society as other members make them feel

marginalized and they face hindrances at school, at home, at job and participating in

social life as they are labeled as an offender and deviance is expected from them.

They lose support from family, friends and community and they reject these

institutions and feel with drawn from society and join their deviant counter parts who

will support and accept them. Deviant behavior is most probable in this new culture

when offenders experience stigma and social isolation (Braithwaite, 1989).

108
2.9.4 Total Institution Theory by Erving Goffman

There are many theories expounded by sociologists and criminologists on the

issue, but the theoretical contributions of Erving Goffman are remarkable and very

close to the methodological plan of this study. His work has not only supplemented

the conceptual framework of the study but also strengthened the academic approach in

this regard. His idea of Total Institution, in fact, highlights the socialization patterns

of an organization which utterly reshapes the personality. It further indicates a place

of work and residence where a great number of similarly situated people stand cut off

from the wider community for a considerable time (Burke, 2013).

Thus, Erving Goffman‘s theory of the total institution is relevant for the

present study. Goffman theory posits that when a person enters into another social

environment, he or she adopt the qualities of that environment through socialization

process. According to this theory, any individual can adopt the behavior or attitude of

the environment in which he/she lives. This theory is best suited with the socialization

of any individual in prison. The same conditions also prevail in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

jails where the juveniles were socialized with criminal minds due to the incongruous

jail environment. The incongruous jail environment of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

manipulates the criminal tendencies in the mind of children at jails.

109
Chapter-III

METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
Research methodology is a process focuses on the types of tools, measures to

be used in the study. Research methodology focuses on data collection, sampling

procedure, analysis and the findings of the study (Babbie & Mouton, 2010). The study

was conducted by using mixed methods research approach, comprising both

quantitative and qualitative methods (See Fig 3.1). This mixed method was adopted to

look into the problem in an actual sense, using the concurrent triangulation strategy of

the mixed methods under the pragmatism paradigm of research philosophy (See Fig

3.2). According to Creswell (2014), concurrent triangulation strategy of mixed

methods approach combining the quantitative and qualitative data, separately

analyzing the qualitative and quantitative, comparing the results and findings of both

the data, to confirm or disconfirm the study data results (See Fig 3.3). In this mixeds

method project, the researcher followed the research philosophies in quantitative,

qualitative and mixed methods portion that how and why this research followed these

paradigms, which explained below in detail.

3.2 Research Philosophy/Paradigm

A research philosophy is a faith about the method in which data (information)

about a problem should be collected, analyzed and systematically arranged.

Epistemology means what is known to be true as opposed to doxology as what is

believed to be true includes the different research philosophies. The main purpose of

science is the procedure of converting things believed into things known doxology to

epistemology. There are two main philosophies have been identified i.e. positivism

110
(mostly called scientific philosophy) and interpretivism/naturalism (Galliers, 1991).

According to Smith and Ragan (1999), the idea in the nature of scientific revolution,

i.e. paradigm is the primary belief and intellectual arrangement upon which research

and progress in a meadow of investigation are based. Patton (1990) defined paradigm

as it is a world idea, a universal perception, a way of contravention down the

complication of the real world.

Guba (1990) and Denzin and Lincoln (2001) defined paradigm as "a set of beliefs

and feelings about the world and how it should be understood and studied." they listed

three categories of those beliefs.

a) Ontology: what type of person is the human being? Ontology deals with the

query of what is real.

b) Epistemology: what is the relationship between the inquirer and the known:

"epistemology is the branch of philosophy that studies the nature of

knowledge and the process by which knowledge is acquired and validated"

(Gall, Borg & Gall, 1996)

c) Methodology: how do we know the world, or gain knowledge of it?

Lincoln and Guba (2000) further classify two more categories i.e. axiology and beliefs

in causality that will differentiate different paradigms. The statements of causality

declare the pose of the nature and opportunity of causal association and axiology

deals with the problems of value. A particular assumption of research activity

embraces the position of value in research activity, how to evade value from

manipulating research activity, and how preeminent to exercise research products

(Baptiste, 2000).

111
Dill and Romiszowski (1997) mentioned five important functions of paradigms:

a) Researchers have to define how the world works. How is knowledge extorted

from this world? And how a person is to think, talk and write about the

world‘s knowledge?

b) The researchers have to explain the different kinds of questions to be asked of

participants and the different methodologies to be used in research.

c) Researchers have to decide that what will be published and what will be not

published.

d) Organize the world of the academic researcher.

e) Explain its importance and its implication.

This research study followed the different research paradigms i.e. positivism

related to a quantitative portion of the study, interpretivism paradigm followed by a

qualitative portion of the study and the two research studies combined in mixed

methods research under the pragmatism paradigm. Below are the details of the

paradigm that how and why this research study followed these paradigm/research

philosophies.

3.2.1 Positivism

According to Rubin and Rubin (2012), ―Positivists assume that reality is fixed,

directly measurable, and knowable and that there is just one truth, one external reality.

In contrast, naturalistic researchers assume that reality constantly changes and can be

known only indirectly, through the interpretations of people; they accept the

possibility that there are multiple versions of reality. People who are uncomfortable

with such uncertainty are more likely to choose the quantitative paradigm with its

assumptions of a single, measurable (countable) and knowable truth; people who can

112
tolerate uncertainty are more likely to favor a qualitative paradigm with its acceptance

of multiple perspectives of truth and constantly changing reality‖ (p. 14).

Lincoln and Guba (2000) acknowledged that there is a single, impartial

method to determine and view reality and was the leading research paradigm

throughout the early 20th century. In contrast, post-positivism presumes that being

nature is composite and multidimensional and seeks to comprehend people and the

cultural and social background within which they live (Myers, 1997).

Table 1 contrasts positivist and naturalist axioms.

a) ―Positivists believe that reality is stable and can be observed and

described from an objective viewpoint, i.e. without interfering with the

phenomena being studied. They contend that phenomena should be

isolated and that observations should be repeatable. This often involves

manipulation of reality with variations in only a single independent

variable so as to identify regularities in, and to form relationships

between, some of the constituent elements of the social world‖ (Levin,

1991, pp. 2-3).

Predictions can be made on the basis of the formerly practical and described

realities and their relationships. "Positivism has a long and rich historical tradition. It

is so embedded in our society that knowledge claims not grounded in positivist

thought are simply dismissed as a scientific and therefore invalid" (Hirschheim, 1985,

p.33). This analysis is ultimately supported by Alavi and Carlson (1992) who, in an

assessment of 902 IS study found that all the practical researches were positivist.

Positivism has also a strong association with the natural and physical sciences. It is

still debatable that whether this positivist paradigm is completely appropriate for the

113
social sciences research (Hirschheim, 1985), several researchers calling for other

pluralistic approaches towards IS research methodologies (see e.g. Bjørn-Andersen,

1985; Remenyi and Williams, 1996). According to Hirschheim (1985), we shall not

intricate on this discussion more, it is connected to our study as it is also the case that

Information Systems, dealing as it does with the communication of people and the

advanced technology, is considered to be of the social sciences rather than the

physical sciences. In fact, a number of the complexities conversant in IS research

activity, such as the clear discrepancy of findings, may be accredited to the

incompatibility of the positivist paradigm for the field. Similarly, some variables of

reality might have been formerly thought immeasurable under the positivist paradigm

and therefore went un-researched (Galliers, 1991).

b) Bell and Bryman (2007) mentioned that positivists use natural science methods to

study social reality and do not view the two areas as detach entities. Positivists‘

researchers followed only one way of phenomena and believe that there is one true

version of reality of an event. They believe from one view point that there are not so

many perceptions of the reality of an act/event (Rubin & Rubin, 2011). The following

of the narrow point by the positivists not fully solve the problems since the lack

perceptive of the reasons for certain phenomena, they are incapable to interfere.

Positivist researchers believe that human scenery is common and did not account for

dissimilarities in people due to religion, culture, race and historical contexts (Babbie

& Mouton, 2010). The most important when the positivists quantify the social world

into static variables the break and destroy the truth and the value of the original data

by imposing their techniques on the data. Positivist researchers did not develop the

exact meaning and results from their investigational research methods (Marshall &

Rossman, 1999).

114
Table 3.1: “Contrasting positivist and naturalist axioms (beliefs and assumptions)
Axioms About Positivist Paradigm Naturalist Paradigm
(Quantitative) (Qualitative)

The nature of reality Reality is single, tangible, Realities are multiple,

and fragmentable. constructed, and holistic.

The relationship of knower
to the known
The possibility of
generalization
Knower and known are
independent, a dualism.
Time- and context-free
generalizations (nomothetic
statements) are possible.
Knower and known are
interactive, inseparable.
Only time- and context-
bound working hypotheses
(idiographic statements) are
possible.

The possibility of causal
linkages
The role of values
Rubin and Rubin (2012)
There are real causes,
temporally precedent to or
simultaneous with their
effects.
Inquiry is value-free.
All entities are in a state of
mutual simultaneous
shaping, so that it is
impossible to distinguish
causes from effects.
Inquiry is value-bound‖.

3.2.2 Quantitative Research

The quantitative research comes under the jurisdiction of positivism paradigm

and using the different statistical tests and quantification of data. Quantitative research

explained below in the light of the positivism and how and why the researcher used

and followed this positivism paradigm in the study. The researcher collected data

from juvenile inmates under positivism and used interview schedule as a quantitative

tool. Quantitative research is ―Explaining phenomena by collecting numerical data

that are analyzed using mathematically based methods‖ (Aliaga & Gunderson, 2002).

Quantitative is a research method which deals with mathematical and statistical

numbers which measure, investigate and the relationship of the different phenomenon

in a systematic way. Quantitative research is used to give answers to research

questions with quantifiable variables with intent to give details, calculate and manage

a phenomenon (Leedy, 1993).

115
3.2.3 Naturalism/Interpretivism

Interpretive researchers responded that through the subjective interpretation

and the intervention of the researchers, in reality, can understand the reality of nature.

The study of a research problem in their natural environment is important to the

naturalist philosophy, mutually with the acknowledgment that social scientists cannot

keep away from affecting those research problems they study. Interpretive confess

that there may be a lot of interpretations of reality but preserve that these

interpretations are in themselves a part of the scientific facts they are following.

Naturalism has a tradition that is no less splendid than that of positivism.

According to Bell and Bryman (2007), interpretivism is an alternate view to

positivism. Interpretivism is concerned with an understanding of social settings and

complex human behavior (De Villiers, 2005). Interpretive consider that nearly all of

our knowledge is gained during social constructions such as consciousness, language,

documents, shared meanings and other relics which have importance in people‘s life

(Bell & Bryman, 2007).

Thus, researchers have their own understanding, their own interpretations and

worldviews regarding the phenomenon in question due to their own cultural and

historical influences. It is therefore imperative that social scientists understand and

interpret the social world from individual participants‘ perspectives and to recognize

that their own backgrounds will influence interpretations of the phenomenon under

study (Creswell & Tashakkori, 2007).

The researchers have their own interpretations and understandings and people

inspections about the phenomenon in research questions due to their own cultural and

historical influences (Miles & Huberman, 1994). It is therefore very important that

116
researchers comprehend and understand the social world from individuals‘ viewpoints

and to identify that their own settings will influence analysis of the phenomenon

which they study (Creswell & Tashakkori, 2007).

3.2.4 Qualitative Research

According to Denzin and Lincoln (1994), ―Qualitative research is multi-

method in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter.

This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings,

attempting to make sense of or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people

bring to them. Qualitative research involves the studied use and collection of a variety

of empirical materials case study, personal experience, introspective, life story

interview, observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts-that describe routine

and problematic moments and meaning in individuals' lives‖ (p. 192).

Creswell (1998) defines ―Qualitative research is an inquiry process of

understanding based on distinct methodological traditions of inquiry that explore a

social or human problem. The researcher builds a complex, holistic picture, analyzes

words, reports detailed views of informants, and conducts the study in a natural

setting‖ (p.15).

Neuman (1992) has differentiated in qualitative and quantitative studies.

According to him, quantitative research is obvious and generalizable beside being

outcome-oriented assuming sometimes as facts and such situation is external to the

researcher or even an independent person. Whereas qualitative research depicts that

all fields of knowledge are assumed as relative because of having subjective element

research, giving the idea that holistic, ungeneralizable studies can be justified‖ (p. 3).

117
 Cook and Reichardt (1979, as cited in Nunan, 1992) presented a table to

elucidate the difference between qualitative and quantitative studies.

Table 3.2: Terms generally associated with qualitative and quantitative research

(Adapted from Cook and Reichardt 1979, as cited in Nunan, 1992, p. 4).

“Qualitative Research Quantitative Research

Advocates use of qualitative methods
concerned with understanding human
behavior from the actor's own frame of
reference
- Naturalistic and uncontrolled
observation
Advocates use of quantitative methods
seeks facts or causes of social
phenomena without regard to the
subjective states of the individual's
Obtrusive and controlled measurement

-Subjective
Close to the data: the 'insider' perspective
Grounded, discovery-oriented,
exploratory, expansionist, descriptive, and
inductive
Process-oriented
Valid: 'real', 'rich', and 'deep' data
Ungeneralisable: single case studies
Assumes a dynamic reality
―(Mack, Woodsong, Macqueen, Guest and Namey, 2005).
-Objective
Removed from the data: the 'outsider'
perspective
Ungrounded, verification-oriented,
confirmatory, reductionist, inferential,
and hypothetical-deductive
Outcome-oriented
-Reliable: 'hard' and replicable data
Generaliable: multiple case studies
Assumes a stable reality‖

The main difference is the flexibility between qualitative and quantitative

methods. The quantitative method is inflexible such as questionnaires, interview

schedule, and surveys in which researcher ask same questions in the same order from

respondents. The inflexibility of this method allows for significant judgment of

answers across respondents and study area. Though, it requires a detailed

understanding of the main questions to inquire from the respondents. Qualitative

research methods are more flexible as compare to quantitative; they provide better

118
spontaneity and adjustment of the interaction between participant and researcher.

Qualitative researcher mostly uses open-ended questions which provide a greater

chance to the researcher to get deep information from the participants. In open-ended

questions, interviewees are not bound to give an answer only in ‗yes‘ or ‗no‘ s/he has

the choice to provide maximum information to the researcher. Furthermore, the

relationship of the researcher with the participant is mostly less formal as compared to

a quantitative method.

3.2.5 Pragmatism

Pragmatism is a philosophical faction (movement) that comprises those

scholars or researchers who argue that a philosophy is factual if it works satisfactory,

the meaning of ideology is to be found when the practical outcomes are accepted and

the unpractical (theoretical) ideology is rejected. Pragmatism is a deconstructive

module that promotes the using of mixed methods in research activity, ―sidesteps the

contentious issues of truth and reality‖ (Feilzer 2010, p. 8), and ―focuses instead on

'what works' as the truth regarding the research questions under investigation‖

(Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003b, p. 713).

Researchers commonly support with one of the three paradigms (Teddlie &

Tashakkori, 2009) i.e. quantitative researchers follow positivism or post-positivism,

qualitative researchers follow interpretivism or naturalism and mixed methods

researchers follow a pragmatism paradigm. Positivism and interpretivism paradigms

predate the pragmatism paradigm. Creswell and Plano Clark (2011) stated that until

the 1980s some researchers used mixed methods research. The mixed methods

research is considered as the third research movement or third wave of research

(Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004) and the "third research community" (Teddlie &

Tashakkori, 2009, p. 4).

119
 Pragmatism is the paradigm which "rejects the either/or choices associated

with the paradigm wars, advocates for the use of mixed methods in research, and

acknowledges that the values of the researcher play a key role in the interpretation

of results" (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003, p. 713). Pragmatism concentrates on both

the qualitative and quantitative study to solve the problems in a proper way rather

than to solve the problem on one research methodology. Merging of quantitative and

qualitative methodologies, procedures of data analyses and attempting "to open up

an inquiry to all possibilities while tying that search to practical ends" (Maxcy,

2003, p. 86).

Maxcy (2003) explained the roots of pragmatism as it is a "distinctly

American philosophy" (p. 56). In the late 19th century, pragmatism began as a

philosophical movement initiated by Charles Sanders Pierce and developed by Arthur

Bentley, George Herber Mead, John Dewey and William James, among others. These

pragmatists challenged the other perspectives of research that in reality the research

problems or the research questions resolve only in one scientific study. They

conveyed that "the course of philosophy away from continental idealism and New

World romantic transcendentalism and toward commonsense practical thinking"

(Maxcy, 2003, p. 55). Maxcy (2003) explained pragmatism as "meaningful research

began not with a single method or set of methods but rather with ordinary experience

and the desire for a better world" (p. 53).

3.2.6 Ontology and Epistemology in Mixed Methods Research

Ontology refers to essential views about the nattier of truth. Mostly

quantitative researchers exemplified as thinking of truth/reality as singular an

objective and on the other hand the qualitative researchers represented the thinking of

reality as multiple and subjective. Epistemology is very much associated to ontology

120
and pertains to views of knowledge and where knowledge comes from, how

knowledge is obtained, whether something can be known beyond the gloom of a

qualm, and what counts as knowledge (Creswell, 2008). What peoples imagine they

know and the types of knowledge they give value are based on epistemological

postulations. According to Krauss (2005), in the positivism, the aim of the study is

considered to be independent of investigators/researchers. Researchers find out and

validate facts through direct observations of the phenomena, information and establish

by captivating separately a fact to study its components elements. On the other hand,

the interpretivism represents that knowledge is recognized through the meaning

attached to the phenomena of the study, researcher collect data from respondents and

investigation changes both the participants and researchers and knowledge is context

and time-dependent.

The followers or researchers of pragmatism are not involved in trying to sort

out ontological or epistemological problems. They just focused on to resolve the

research problems in a proper way with the combination of different perspectives and

methodologies in research. Greene (2005) focused on variety and the melding of

various epistemologies. Greene defined mixed methods as "an approach that actively

includes, even welcomes, multiple methodological traditions, multiple ways of

knowing and multiple value stances" (p. 208). She added.

A mixed methods researcher applied different methodologies for varieties and

diversities as manifest in research activity. A mixed method way of thinking is itself

anchored in values of respect, acceptance, differences, toleration, and multiplism.

Furthermore, a pragmatism way of idea seeks better, inclusive understanding of facts,

understanding that is rush from filaments of particularity and generality, inside and

121
outside perspectives, change and stability, the entire and its ingredient parts, difficulty

and patterned reliability, justice and brilliance and so forth. ―That is, a mixed method

way of thinking seeks not so much convergence as insight; the point is not a well-

fitting model or curve but rather the generation of important understandings and

discernment through the juxtaposition of different lenses, perspectives, and stances; in

a good mixed methods study, difference is constitutive and fundamentally generative‖

(p. 208).

3.2.7 Mixed Methods Research

According to Johnson, Onwuegbuzie, and Tumer (2007), mixed-methods

research is a combination of "elements of qualitative and quantitative research

approaches (e.g., use of qualitative and quantitative viewpoints, data collection,

analysis, inference techniques) for the purposes of breadth and depth of understanding

and corroboration" (p. 123). Mixed methods researchers combine several approaches

or methodologies to give a proper and exact answer to research questions. It is

comprehensive, pluralistic, harmonizing and assorted. In this methodology of

research, the mixing of several studies involves collecting data, analyzing of data, and

integrating the qualitative and quantitative research in one study (Creswell & Plano

Clark, 2011).

122
Fig 3.1

Quantitative Research Qualitative Research

Mixed
Methods
Research
Quantitati Qualitativ
ve e
Research Research

123
3.2.8 Purposes of Mixed Methods

The purpose of the mixed methods is to combine both the quantitative and

qualitative research, to give a better answer to the research questions either research

methodology alone (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). The mixed methods can

exemplify and clarify quantitative results, explain both the methods and product,

verify causes for unforeseen effects, develop the base for tools, show the level of

generality, confirm and triangulate other facts, and gain the goals (Krathwohl, 2009).

There are numerous motives for adding the second study to support the first study

overcomes the weaknesses of the one study by the strong results of the second study

(Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011, p. 192).

3.2.9 Triangulation

Triangulation is the process or the act which combine more research studies or

methods in a single research project. The triangulation is also called mixed methods

somewhat it overlaps with the mixed method but in reality, it is not mixed method it is

just the process of mixing several data sets (Creswell, 2014).

Concurrent Strategy of Mixed Methods Research

Creswell (2014) identified three designs of concurrent mixed methods strategy

which are concurrent triangulation design, concurrent nested design, and concurrent

transformative design. In these designs priority should be given to one of the data i.e.

quantitative or qualitative and data should be collected at the same phase. The

function of this strategy is to use both the quantitative and qualitative data to precisely

define the relationships among different variables or themes.

124
 Fig 3.2

(Creswell, 2014)

Strategies of Mixed methods Research

Concurrent Sequential
Strategy Strategy

Concurrent Concurrent Sequential Sequential

Nested Design Triangulation Explanatory Exploratory
Design Design Design

Concurrent
Sequential
Transformative
Transformative
Design
Design

125
Concurrent Triangulation Design of Concurrent Mixed Methods Strategy

In this design, quantitative and qualitative data were collected in one phase

concurrently/parallel. The data analyzed independently and then compared the results

of both the data with each other in similarities and differences (See Fig 3.3). This

design mostly used to overcome the flaws/weaknesses in one study with the strengths

of the other study (Creswell, 2014).

In this study first, the researcher followed the positivism paradigm in

quantitative portion then followed the interpretivism paradigm in qualitative portion

of the study and in last the researcher followed the third paradigm i.e. pragmatism in

mixed methods portion of the study. In these three paradigms, the researcher covered

the questions of how and why he selected this methodology of research philosophy.

The research topic is related to incongruous jail environment; it is fact that Pakistani

jails are not congruous for juvenile inmates under positivism. The researcher wanted

to investigate further the fact and incongruous environment in interpretivism

paradigm and then combined both the facts of positivism and further investigation of

the problem in pragmatism paradigm with the epistemological and ontological study.

126
Fig 3.3

Concurrent Triangulation Strategy

Quantitative Qualitative

Quantitative Qualitative
Data Collection Data Collection

Quantitative Qualitative
Data Analysis Data Analysis

Mixed in Discussion

Comparison of
Data Results

Consonant Inconsonant
Views Views

127
3.3 Universe of the Study

There are no specific rules for the selection of a study universe, but it depends

on the nature and scope of the investigation, either it has similar or different

characteristics (Creswell, 2014). The universe of the study was the juvenile inmates of

the selected jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for quantitative portion and other agents of

the justice system (Lawyers, Jail staff, probation officers and juvenile inmates whose

ages were in between 15-18 years) for qualitative segment of the study. These jails

were selected because of the presence of higher number of juvenile inmates over

there. For this study the jails of Peshawar, Mardan, Swabi, Mansehra and DI khan

were selected. According to Sparc (2015) the sampled prisons were selected as study

units because juvenile prisoners were in adequate numbers i.e. 199.

3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Procedures

―The quality of a piece of research stands or falls not only by appropriateness

of methodology and instrumentation but also by the suitability of the sampling

strategy that has been adopted‖ (Morrison, 1993: 112-117). Creswell (2014) argued

that Concurrent Mixed Methods Sampling design should be given for Mixed Methods

Research (MMR). According to Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child

(SPARC, 2015), the total population of juvenile inmates in the sampled jails in

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was 199. The researcher used simple random sampling as a

technique of probability sampling. Using sample size framework of Krejcie and

Morgan (1970), the researcher collected data from a total of 132 out of 199 juvenile

prisoners as sample size in the quantitative segment of the study which was further

distributed into the number of juvenile prisoners in sampled jails as per the

proportional allocation method, as explained in table No.3.3 (a). In the qualitative

segment of the study the researcher used purposive sampling as a sample technique of

128
the non-probability sampling. In this portion of the study, the researcher collected

primary data from 20 juvenile inmates through in-depth interviews. These 20 juvenile

prisoners were between 15-18 years old because juveniles less than 15 years of age

were unable to respond to the in-depth questions. Apart from this criterion, those

juveniles whose ages were 15-18 years were interviewed because they did understand

the nature of the questions and gave the in-depth answers to the questions. Moreover,

10 jail staff, 10 legal counsels and 10 probation officers were also interviewed

through the in-depth interview method thus; the total participants for qualitative

portion of the study were 50, as explained in table No.3.3. (b).

Table No 3.3 (a): Breakup of the Quantitative Study Respondents

Jails No of Juvenile Prisoners Sample Taken

Peshawar 88 58

Dera Ismail Khan 23 15

Mardan 22 15

Swabi 20 13

Mansehra 46 31

Total 199 132

3.4.1 Proportional Allocation Method Formula

ni = n.Ni
N
ni = Proportion of sample allocated to ith strata
Ni = Population of ith stratum
n = Total sample size
N = Total Population
(Chaudry and Kamal, 2004)

129
 Table No. 3.3 (b): Breakup of the Qualitative Study Participants

Participants Numbers

Juvenile Prisoners 20

Jail Staff 10

Probation Officers 10

Legal Counsels 10

Total 50

3.5 Tools of Data Collection

Data collection is a procedure through which the researcher gathers the

information from related resources to get responses (answers) to the study issue, test

the hypotheses, give answers to the research questions and evaluate the results. Though

collecting the information, the investigator must identify the types of the information,

source of information and the technique to be used to gather the information. The most

important the researcher has to give respond to the questions that who, when and where

the information is to be collected (Sapsford & Jupp, 2006). Ackroyd (1992) Neuman

(2013) explained that through which methods the data collected depends on the

research problem to be studied, the research design and the data collected about the

exact variable. There are two major methods of data collection.

3.5.1 Primary Data Collection Methods

Primary data are that information which is collected for the first time from the

respondents/participents by the researcher. The investigator gathers the fresh data when

the research area is unique and no other person worked on the same research topic.

Primary data collection is very difficult, a lot of time and money consuming but the

results of the research activity are more accurate (Ackroyd, 1992; Neuman, 2013).

130
 3.5.2 Secondary Data Collection Methods

Secondary data are that information which is easily available, not so costly

and time-consuming. Someone already done work on that data and passed through

different types of analysis and the findings come through this type of data collection

are not so authentic, the experts raise questions over the results of secondary data.

There are different instruments using for data collection, depending on the nature of the

research problem i.e. surveys, focus group discussion, interviews, and observations etc

to extract free-flowing views (Sandelowski, 2000).

There are different types of tools using for primary data collection. In this

study the researcher used two types of tools of primary data collection for mixed

methods research i.e. the researcher used interview schedule as a tool of quantitative

data collection for juvenile inmates and interview guide used as a tool of qualitative

data collection for jail staff, probation officers, legal counsels and juvenile inmates

whose age was 15-18 years.

3.5.3 Quantitative Tool of Data Collection

The interview schedule was used as an instrument for quantitative data

collection as it is a part of survey method (See Annexure-I). The researcher used a

closed-ended interview schedule defined by Kumar (2011) ―An interview schedule is a

written list of questions, open-ended or closed, prepared for use by an interviewee in a

person to person or face to face interaction or through telephonic conversation‖. The

age of the juvenile inmates was from 11-18 years, a questionnaire was not appropriate

tool because they were unable to understand the depth of the questions. The researcher

asked questions from juveniles and they answered in three mentioned options i.e.

Agree, disagree and don‘t know. The researcher filled the empty box in front of the

questions in check-list. The researcher used a Likert scale of three options as explained

131
by Dr. Rensis Likert (1932) emphasized on developing a tool by which psychological

attitude could be measured and then reasonably interpreted through a proper metric

scale. The Likert scale gives a statement/question, which respondents requested to give

an answer. It is one of the standard scales to gather data or opinion of the respondents

(Kothari, 2004).

3.5.4 Qualitative Tools of Data Collection

Qualitative research contains multiple methods of data collection which

include participant observation, textual or visual analysis like from book vides and

interviewing includes, groups and organizations. The semi-structured interview guide

was used as a tool for garnering detailed information from the jail staff, probation

officers, legal counsels and the juvenile prisoners from 15-18 age group who were

interviewed under the in-depth interview method in sampled jails (See Annexure-II).

Bryman (2012) defined interview guide as ―Interview guide is a rather vague term that

is used to refer to the brief list of memory prompts of areas to be covered that is often

employed in unstructured interviewing or to the somewhat more structured list of

issues to be addressed or questions to be asked in semi-structured interviewing‖. In-

depth interview is commonly used a qualitative research whereby interviewees are

investigated intensively, and their number is nornamlly small. This takes time just to

see their perspectives on different situations. Bryman (2012) has referred to the very

structure of in-depth interview and held the view that a semi-structured interview

provides an opportunity to both the interviewers and interviewees to supplement

additional knowledge which could give a new direction.

The time taken by each interview with juvenile inmates, jail staff, legal

counsels and probation officers was one hour. In three jails the authority allowed the

mobile phone for recording the interviews of the juvenile prisoners and jail staff and in

132
the remaining two jails they did not allow mobile phone or any other recorder due to

security concerns. In these two jails, the researcher did not record the memos and just

focused on to write the jottings and notes with a full concentration along with asking

questions from them. In the collection of qualitative data from probation officers and

legal counsels the researcher used a smartphone as a recorder for memos and recorded

the interviews with their consent. The researcher was writing notes (jottings) with full

concentration and focused on the attitude, responses and on their emotions when the

researcher was interviewing the participants. The researcher gave full freedom to the

participants in their answering time; the researcher did not interfere in any of their

answers. When the researcher started the analysis of the data, some of the similar codes

(themes) not emerged from the empirical data like the variables in the quantitative data.

As mentioned by Creswell (2014) that in concurrent triangulation strategy the

quantitative variables and the qualitative major themes will be same because of the

comparison of the two data sets in convergent and divergent results of the data. This

was the most difficult phase of the whole project, as of the demand of the concurrent

triangulation design the researcher again collected the primary qualitative data for the

same themes. After some minor changes in the interview-guide and collection of three

times the qualitative data then the same themes emerged from the empirical data like

the quantitative variables.

3.6 Data Analyses

The quantitative data was analyzed through the computer software of

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The process of analysis was made

with the help of frequency and percentages through tabulated data in descriptive

statistics. In inferential statistics Chi-square test was used for the association of

dependent and independent variables (Mc call and Robert, 1975). Dependent variable,

133
i.e well-being of juveniles is operationalized and indexed properly, so that to assess its

association with the prison environment. Qualitative data was analyzed through

transcribing the data and identification of themes for interpretation, the thematic

analysis gives emphasis to examining, pinpointing and patterns from the data

(Creswell, 2010). These patterns or themes in the data were significant to the

explanation of the fact connected to the research questions. Personal observation and

previous literature were also included in the qualitative data analysis to understand the

views of the participants. In the end, quantitative and qualitative data were clubbed

under the concurrent triangulation design along with consonant and inconsonant

views of the respondents and participants as per the analogy devised by Creswell

(2014). The researcher used a concurrent triangulation design in mixed methods

research the researcher collected both data at the same time, analyzed the two

databases separately and then brought the two databases together. Researcher used the

concurrent triangulation design first analyzed the quantitative statistical data and then

the qualitative codes or themes, but the variables in quantitative and themes in

qualitative data were same. In the discussion section, the data merged and then

compared to determine whether the data results are similar or dissimilar. If divergence

occurs in both the databases, this represents weak results of the data in this study the

researcher further collected the empirical data to overcome the weaknesses and

differences of the data (Creswell, 2014).

3.6.1 Chi-square Test

In this research, for the test of association between dependent and

independent variables, the chi-square test was used as per formula is given by Mc call

and Robert (1975).

134
 c r (Oij  eij ) 2
  2

i 1 j 1 eij
Where

= Categorical variables of chi-square

= Frequencies which are observed in the cross-classified category at jth columned

it rows

= the expected frequency, considering no association between dependent and

independent variables under study. The chi-square formula is obtained by taking the
square of summation of these frequencies and then divides by the expected frequency.
After obtaining the resultant frequency, then distributed it on chi-square test with the
relevant degree of freedom. The degree of freedom can be calculated as follows:

dof= (r-1) (c-1) Where

dof = Degree of freedom

r= rows number

C = column number

3.7 Ethical Consideration

The researcher strictly observed ethical considerations while carrying out this

study. According to Marshall and Rossman (1999), ethical consideration such as

anonymity of the participants, protecting the participants and the most important the

consent of the interviewees is very much important in research activity. First of all,

the researcher sent an application to the home minister of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa

(KP) Province of Pakistan. He signed the application and attached a letter from his

official authority and sent the application along with a letter to the prisons minister of

KP. Prisons minister signed the application and marked to the inspector general (IG)

of KP prisons. For the first time, the IG prisons rejected the application that we have

135
security issues and said that the researcher did not attach the tools of data collection

with the application. The researcher again contacted the minister of prisons, he

suggested that the researcher have to write another application and attach the

educational documents along with the tools of data collection. The researcher again

submitted an application to the inspector general of KP along with documents,

identity card photocopy, Ph.D. research proposal and the tools of data collection. He

took the application and after twenty-one days the administrative person of the IG

prison office contacted the researcher that the application has been approved. The

researcher went to the IG prison office he provided a letter from his office and said

that he contacted to all the prisons and he sent letters to all jails‘ superintendent which

the researcher mentioned in his application. He further added that the superintendents

of all jails will support and they will allow the researcher to collect the primary data

from juvenile prisoners and jail staff. The researcher guaranteed the respondents and

participants that there should be no harm to them in this research work. The

researcher make ensured that interviewees protected from different types of

impairment, such as physical impairment, stress, harm to their future job and self-

esteem. The researcher did not force any interviewee to provide their personal

information and any other information which they did not want to share as mentioned

by Creswell (2010). The researcher provided tools for data collection to the entire

respondents and participants and discussed the tools with juveniles that if someone

did not want to be part of the research activity he excused on that time with their own

choice. First, the researcher gave consent letter to each respondents and participants,

in which the researcher talked about the benefits of the research activity mentioned by

Hoyle, Harris, and Judd (2002). The researcher ensured the interviewees' privacy;

their information was kept secret. The researcher cleared each and everything to the

136
interviewees about the research activity. The researcher did not used any trickery in

the research project and guaranteed the confidentiality of the interviewees. In order to

protect the privacy of the respondents, the researcher dispensed a pseudonym

(supposed names) to each participant along with probation officers, jail staff and legal

counsels. Juvenile interviewees expected from the researcher that he will provide

them any legal assistance and other help, but the researcher cleared them that he is

just collecting data for his academic activity the researcher did not help any of the

juveniles as explained by Richards and Schwartz (2002). The researcher provided a

free environment to the respondents and participants, they expressed their views in

detail, and the researcher did not interfere in their responses. The researcher observed

and focused on the emotions and attitudes of the interviewees that if they are feeling

bore the researcher will end the interview, but all the interviewees provided proper

time and in-depth information about the study area as advice by Larsen, Flesaker and

Stege (2008).

137
Chapter - IV

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter contains both quantitative and qualitative data which were

analyzed under the concurrent triangulation strategy of mixed methods research

(MMR) approach. Furthermore, a side by side approach was adopted in analyzing the

data. Quantitative and qualitative data on a particular quantitative variables and

related qualitative themes were tabulated first and then interpreted side by side. In

order to verify the conformities and disconformities in the two data, the comparison

was made alongside with necessary discussion. Quantitative data was gathered from

132 juvenile prisoners in selected jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province of Pakistan

while 50 juvenile prisoners, jail staff, probation officers and legal counsels were

qualitatively interviewed through in-depth interviews.

The chapter contains three different sections that deal with the analyses of

collected data from the target populations relating to the prisons in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa. Section 4.1 comprises the demographic profile of the sampled

respondents. Section 4.2 comprises the explanation of the uni-variate analysis of the

variables of the study. And section 4.3 contains the bi-variate analysis of the

dependent variable and independent variables and also describes the thematic analysis

of the qualitative study.

4.1 Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents

Keeping in view its significance, demographic information was obtained from

each respondent. The demographic profile contains information about age, education,

residential area, family type of respondents along with additional information like

parents‘ occupation, education and monthly income etc. The demographic

information of the sampled respondents is given below.

138
4.1.1 Age of the respondents

Age of Respondents Frequency Percentage

Less than 11 00 00

11-15 57 43.2

16-18 75 56.8

Total 132 100.0

Table No.4.2.1 shows that the age of respondents ranging from less than 11 to

18 years. The majority of juveniles (i.e. 56.8 percent) were in the age group of 16 to

18 years while 43.2 percent of juveniles were in the age group of 11 to 15 years.

4.1.2 Education of the Respondents

Education Frequency Percent

Not enrolled 26 19.7

Kg-Grade 6 56 42.4

Grade 07 to Grade 12 50 37.9

Total 132 100.0

Education is one of the basic institutions which play a vital role in the skill

development of the human being. Table No.4.1.2 shows the educational level of

respondents, as a majority of them (i.e. 42.4 percent) had education up to Grade 6.

Furthermore, 37.9 percent of juveniles‘ educational level was from Grade 07 to Grade

12 followed by 19.7 percent of juveniles with no education.

139
4.1.3 Type of Residential Area of the Respondents

Residential Area Frequency Percent

Urban 51 38.6

Rural 81 61.4

Total 132 100.0

Table No.4.1.3 shows the type of residential area of the juvenile respondents.

The majority of the juveniles (i.e. 61.4 percent) resided in rural areas while 38.6

percent of the respondents lived in urban dwellings.

4.1.4 Family Type of the Respondents

Family Type Frequency Percent

Nuclear 71 53.8

Joint 61 46.2

Total 132 100.0

Family is abasic institution and is considered the mother of all institutions

which socializes its members. Table No. 4.1.4 signifies the family type of the

respondents. The majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 53.8 percent) were from

nuclear families while 46.2 percent of the juvenile respondents belonged to the joint

family system.

4.1.5 Life Status of Parents of Sampled Respondents

Status of Parents Frequency Percent

Father Alive 09 6.8

Mother Alive 14 10.6

Both Alive 109 82.6

Total 132 100.0

140
 Parents are considered to be pillars of the family--without parents, the family

is incomplete. Table No. 4.1.5 shows the living status of parents; whether either or

both were alive. The majority (i.e. 82.6 percent) of juvenile respondents reported that

both father and mother were alive. Moreover, 10.6 percent of juvenile respondents

indicated that only their mothers were alive, and 6.8 percent juvenile respondents

responded that only their father were alive.

4.1.6 Family Atmosphere of Respondents

Atmosphere Frequency Percent

Pleasant 100 75.8

Unpleasant 09 6.8

Mother or Father Not Alive 23 17.4

Total 132 100.0

Table No. 4.1.6 indicates the relationship between parents of juvenile

respondents whether their relationship was pleasant or unpleasant. The majority (i.e.

75.8 percent) juveniles reported that the relationship between their parents was

pleasant. Furthermore, 6.8 percent juvenile respondents were of the view that the

relationships between their parents were unpleasant. In addition, some juvenile

respondents (17.4 percent) indicated that one of their parents was not alive and,

therefore, they could not offer a response to this question.

4.1.7 Fathers’ Current Occupation, if alive

Father’s Occupation Frequency Percent

Not Alive 14 10.6

Government Service 32 24.2

Private Service 25 18.9

Agriculture 24 18.2

Business 37 28.0

Total 132 100.0

141
 Table No.4.1.7 shows the profession of the respondents‘ fathers. The majority

(i.e. 28.0 percent) of fathers were involved in business, 24.2 percent of juveniles‘

fathers were associated with government services followed by 18.9 percent who were

involved in private services while 18.2 percent were in jobs related to the agriculture

sector. There were 10.6 percent of juveniles whose fathers were not associated with

any profession because they were not alive.

4.1.8 Mothers’ Occupation, if alive

Mother’s Occupation Frequency Percent

Not Alive 09 06.8

House Wife 108 81.8

Government Service 14 10.6

Private Service 01 0.8

Total 132 100.0

Table No.4.1.8 shows the profession of juveniles‘ mothers. The majority, 81.8

percent, of juveniles‘ mothers worked as house wives. There were 10.6 percent of

juvenile respondents‘ mothers associated with government services followed by 06.8

percent juveniles‘ mothers who were not alive. Moreover, 0.8 percent of juvenile

respondents‘ mothers were involved in private services.

4.1.9 Educational Status of Respondents’ Fathers

Educational Status of Frequency Percent
Respondents’ Fathers
Illiterate 20 15.1

Up to Matric 52 39.4

Above Matric 60 45.5

Total 132 100.0

142
 Table No. 4.1.9 illustrates the educational level of juveniles‘ fathers, the

majority (i.e. 45.5 percent) of the fathers‘ education level were above metric.

Furthermore, 39.4 percent of juveniles reported that their fathers had education level

up to metric. Moreover, 15.1 percent juveniles said that their fathers were illiterate.

4.1.10 Mother’s Education

Educational Status of Respondents’ Frequency Percent

Mothers
Illiterate 96 72.7

Up to Matric 25 18.9

Above Matric 11 08.3

Total 132 100.0

Table No. 4.1.10 shows the educational level of juveniles‘ mothers, the

majority (i.e. 72.7 percent) of juveniles‘ mothers were illiterate. Moreover, 18.9

percent of juveniles responded that their mothers were educated up to metric, while

08.3 percent juveniles‘ mother‘s educational level were above metric.

4.1.11 Family Size of Juvenile Respondents

Family Size of Juvenile Frequency Percent

Respondents
Less than 3 15 11.4

4-10 87 65.9

Above 10 30 22.7

Total 132 100.0

Table No. 4.1.11 shows the family size of the juvenile respondents. The

majority (i.e. 65.9 percent) of families consisted of 4-10 persons. There were 22.7

143
percent of juveniles who said that their family consisted of more than 10 members;

while 11.4 percent of juveniles reported that their family size was comprised of less

than 3 members.

4.1.12 Family’s Monthly Income from all Resources

Total Income of the Family in Frequency Percent

PKR
Less than 10,000 12 09.1
10,001-30,000 89 67.4
Above 30,000 31 23.5
Total 132 100.0

Table No. 4.1.12 reveals the monthly income of the respondents‘ family from

all resources. The majority (i.e. 67.4 percent) of juveniles responded that their family

income ranged from 10,001 to 30,000 rupees per month. There were 109.1 percent of

juveniles who said that their family income was less than 10000 rupees per month.

Moreover, 23.5 percent of juveniles reported that the total monthly income of their

family was more than 30,000 rupees per month.

4.1.13 Nature of Crime by Juveniles

Crime Type Frequency Percent
Murder 27 20.5
Dacoity 17 12.9
Robbery 19 14.4
Sexual Abuse 27 20.5
SnatchingValuables 19 14.4
Quarrel with Parents 04 03.0
Assault on Someone 05 03.8
Drugs 14 10.6
Total 132 100.0

144
 Table No. 4.1.13 indicates the nature of crime for which juveniles were

experiencing jail life. For murder and sexual abuse cases there were 20.5 percent of

juveniles incarcerated for each category of crime. Furthermore, 14.4 percent of

juveniles for each category of crime said that they had engaged in robbery and the

snatching of valuable things from other people. In addition, 12.9 percent of juveniles

were involved in delinquent activities and committed a crime in the form of Dacoity.

Moreover, 10.6 percent of juveniles indicated that they committed a crime in the shape

of drugs supply followed by 3.8 percent juveniles involved in an assault on someone.

Furthermore, 3.0 percent of juveniles had quarreled with their parents at home.

4.1.14 Status of the Juveniles’ Suits

Status of Juveniles’ Suits Frequency Percent
Decided by the Court 03 02.3
Still Under Hearing at Court 115 87.1
Yet to go to Court 14 10.6
Total 132 100.0

Table No. 4.1.14 shows the data about the status of the juveniles‘ suits, where

the majority, 87.1 percent, of the juvenile respondents reported that their cases were

still under hearing at the court. This was followed by 10.6 percent of juveniles who

had not yet faced a judge. In addition, 02.3 percent of juveniles reported that their

cases had been decided by the court.

4.1.16 Time Span/Length of Juvenile Trials

Length of juveniles’ trial Frequency Percent
Up to 01 Month 15 11.4
2-4 Months 68 51.5
5-8 Months 33 25.0
9-12 Months 13 9.8
Above 01 year 03 2.3
Total 132 100.0

145
 The above table shows the length of juveniles‘ trials. The majority of 51.5

percent of juvenile cases trial lasted from 2 to 4 months followed by 25 percent of

trials that went for 5 to 8 months. There were 11.4 percent of juveniles‘ trials that

lasted up to 01 month followed by 9.8 percent of juveniles whose suits lasted for 9 to

12 months, whereas 2.3 percent of trials lasted for more than 1 year.

4.1.17 Duration of Staying at Jails

Time spent in jail Frequency Percent

Less than one year 81 61.4

One year 40 30.3

Upto five years 11 8.3

Total 132 100.0

The above table shows the time spent in jail by the sampled juveniles. The

majority (i.e. 61.4 percent) of juveniles spent less than one year at jail while 30.3

percent of juveniles spent one year, whereas 8.3 percent of juveniles spent up to 5

years at the jail.

146
4.2 Uni-Variate Analysis

Table No. 4.2.1 Living Condition Confronting Juvenile Prisoners at Jail

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles have separate bed at 05 3.8 122 92.4 05 3.8 132
jail

Juveniles live in a congested 115 87.1 17 12.9 00 00 132

space
Mattresses and blankets etc. are
06 4.5 125 94.7 01 0.8 132
provided at the jail

Clean drinking water is available 06 4.5 124 93.9 02 1.5 132

at jail

There is enough water at the jail 05 3.8 125 94.7 02 1.5 132
for the cleaning purposes

Juveniles are satisfied with the 28 21.2 103 78.0 01 0.8 132
toilet facility at the jail

Juveniles are satisfied with the 04 3.0 127 96.2 01 0.8 132
food provided at the jail

Sanitation arrangement is 110 83.3 13 9.8 09 6.8 132

satisfactory at jail

They were exposed to different 125 94.7 07 5.3 00 00 132

diseases due to unhygienic and
even lack of food.

Windows are there at jail 111 84.1 19 14.4 02 1.5 132

Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.1 shows the different aspects of living conditions at the sampled

jails in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan. The majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e.

147
92.4 percent) reported that they had no separate bed at the jail while 3.8 percent

respondents said that they had separate bed at the jail. The remaining 3.8 percent of

respondents knew nothing about a separate bed because they slept on hard mat on the

floor. While discussing jail environment the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e.

87.1 percent) responded that juveniles lived in a congested space, whereas 12.9

percent of respondents were of the opinion that they were not living in a congested

space in the sampled jails. Asking about the mattresses and blanket etc., the majority

of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 94.7 percent) answered that mattresses and blankets

were not provided to juveniles, 4.5 percent said that these things were provided to

them and 0.8 percent of juveniles said that they did not know. Furthermore, while

asking about the availability of clean drinking water at jail, the majority of the

juvenile respondents (i.e. 93.9 percent) said that there was no clean drinking water

available at the jail. Only 4.5 percent of juvenile respondents answered that they were

satisfied from the drinking water and 1.5 percent answered that they did not know

about the availability of clean drinking water at jail. Moreover, asking about the

availability of water for cleaning purposes, 94.7 percent of juvenile respondents said

that they were not provided enough water for cleaning and bathing purposes, 3.8

percent answered that they were provided with enough water for cleaning purposes,

and 1.5 percent of respondents did not specify their answer about enough water for

cleaning and bathing purposes. Asking about the toilet facility, the majority of the

juvenile respondents (i.e.78.0 percent) were not satisfied with the toilet facility, 21.2

percent of juveniles were satisfied with the toilet facility provided to them at prison,

and 0.8 percent of juvenile respondents did not express their views on the statement.

While discussing the quality of food, 96.2 percent of juvenile respondents said they

were not satisfied with the quality of food, 3.0 percent answered that they were

148
satisfied with the quality of food, and 0.8 percent did not express their views about the

quality of food. Asking about the sanitation system at jail, 83.3 percent of juvenile

respondents declared that there were no sanitation problems at the jail, 9.8 percent

respondents were of the view that they were not satisfied with the sanitation system,

while 6.8 percent respondents replied that they did not know about the sanitation

problems at the jail. While asking about the prevalence of diseases due to unhygienic

food or water, the majority of the juvenile respondents i.e. 94.7 percent answered that

Lack of food or drinking water causes diseases, where only 5.3 percent juvenile

respondents were against this view that food causes diseases. While asking about the

windows for fresh air and lighting, 84.1 percent of juvenile respondents said that there

were proper windows present at jail, 14.4 percent of juvenile respondents added that

there were no proper windows at the jail, and 1.5 percent juvenile respondents replied

that they did not know about proper windows at the jail. Where Rodriguez (2007)

suggests that all prisoners, including juveniles, should have separate sleeping rooms

and should also be provided with the basic facilities to these prisoners, in the above

results and discussion, it is concluded from the above findings that basic facilities

were not provided to juveniles in the sampled jails in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

149
Table No. 4.2.2 Attitude of Jail Staff towards Juvenile Inmates

Statement Agree Disagree Don’tknow Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Jail staff deals fairly with 09 6.8 117 88.6 06 4.5 132
juveniles

Jail staff is promoting the welfare 11 8.3 118 89.4 03 2.3 132
of juveniles

Rehabilitative and correctional 02 1.5 127 96.2 03 2.3 132

facilities are available at jail for
juveniles

Cruel/humiliating practices are 96 72.7 18 13.6 18 13.6 132

carried out at the jail

Penalty at jail has negative effects 93 70.5 15 11.4 24 18.2 132

on juveniles

Unhealthy behavior of staff 94 71.2 13 9.8 25 18.9 132

promotes criminal tendencies at
jail

Jail staff demands different forms 102 77.3 21 15.9 09 6.8 132
ofcompensation when juveniles
need something

Juveniles have easy access to legal 06 4.5 113 85.6 13 9.8 132
counsel, probation officers and
parents

Jail staff teaches ethics/manners 03 2.3 125 94.7 04 3.0 132

to juveniles
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.2 shows the attitude of jail staff with juvenile prisoners. A

number of statements about the attitude of the jail staff were used to determine

whether jail staff deals fairly with juvenile prisoners. The majority of the juvenile

respondents (i.e. 88.6 percent) disagreed with the statement that the jail staff dealt

150
fairly with juveniles. Only 6.8 percent of juvenile respondents agreed that the attitude

of the jail staff was supportive, while 4.5 percent of juveniles did not express their

views about the attitude of jail staff. While asking whether jail staff promotes the

welfare of juveniles, the majority of juvenile respondents (i.e. 89.4 percent) disagreed

whereas 8.3 percent of respondents agreed with the statement and 2.3 percent

juveniles did not express their views. Asking about the availability of rehabilitative

and correction facilities at jail for juvenile inmates, the majority of the juvenile

respondents (i.e. 96.2 percent) disagreed with the statement, only 1.5 percent juvenile

respondents agreed with the statement, while 2.3 percent did not express their views.

Asking about cruel, humiliating practices at jail, the majority (i.e.72.7 percent)

juvenile respondents agreed with the statement, whereas 13.6 percent respondents

disagreed, and 13.6 percent respondents were of the view that they not know whether

cruel practices were carried out at jail. Asking whether penalties at jail had negative

effects on juveniles, the majority of the respondents (i.e. 70.5 percent) agreed with the

statement while 11.4 percent juvenile respondents disagreed with the statement and

18.2 percent respondents did not know. Asking whether unhealthy staff behavior

promotes criminal tendencies at the jail, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e.

71.2 percent) agreed with the statement, 9.8 percent juvenile respondents disagreed

with the statement and 18.9 were of the view that they did not know about the

statement. Asking whether jail staff demanded different forms of compensation when

juveniles need something, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 77.3 percent)

agreed, 15.9 percent of the juvenile respondents disagreed with the statement, and 6.8

percent of the juveniles did not know about the statement. While asking whether

juvenile prisoners had access to legal counsels, probation officers and parents easily,

the majority (i.e. 85.6 percent) of the juvenile respondents disagreed, 4.5 percent of

151
juveniles agreed, and 9.8 percent of juveniles did not state their view on free and easy

access of juveniles to legal counsels and probation officers. Asking whether jail staff

teaches ethics/manners to juveniles, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 94.7

percent) disagreed with the statement, 2.3 percent of the juveniles agreed, and 3.0

percent of the juvenile respondents did not express their views on whether jail staff

teaches ethics and manners to juveniles.

Table No. 4.2.3 Juvenile Jails (Borstal Institutions)

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles are beaten at jail 102 77.3 29 22.0 01 0.8 132

Juveniles are fearful ofthe jail 125 94.7 06 4.5 01 0.8 132
staff

Juveniles are prey to ill manners 125 94.7 06 4.5 01 0.8 132
of jail staff like shouting,
bullying and beating

Overcrowding at jail increases 97 73.5 12 9.1 23 17.4 132

disharmony among juveniles

Recreational services are 08 6.1 121 91.7 03 2.3 132

available to juveniles at jail

Jail life disturbs the smooth 118 89.4 11 8.3 03 2.3 132
functioning of juveniles’ lives

Medical services are there at jail 10 7.6 121 91.7 01 0.8 132

Skill development programs are 02 1.5 123 93.2 07 5.3 132

there for juveniles

Juveniles sleep and live a relaxed 03 2.3 127 96.2 02 1.5 132
life at jail
Source: Field survey, 2016.

152
 Table No. 4.2.3 indicates the data about the non-existence of juvenile jails

(Borstal Institutions). A question was asked about the beating of juveniles at jail. The

majority (i.e. 77.3 percent) of the juvenile respondents agreed with the statement,

while 22.0 percent juveniles were against the statement and 0.8 percent said that they

did not know whether juveniles are beaten at jail or not. Furthermore, the statement

was asked about the fearless of juveniles from the jail staff, majority of the juvenile

respondents (i.e. 94.7 percent) agreed whereas 4.5 percent disagreed with the

statement, while 0.8 percent said that they did not know about the fearfulness of

juveniles caused by the jail staff. Moreover, discussing the statement regarding

whether juveniles were prey to ill manners of jail staff like shouting, bullying and

beating, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 94.7 percent) agreed with the

statement, 4.5 percent juvenile respondents disagreed, and 0.8 percent juveniles were

of the view that they did not know about the statement. Asking whether overcrowded

conditions at a jail increases disharmony among juveniles, the majority of the

respondents (i.e. 73.5 percent) agreed with the statement that jails were overcrowded,

9.1 percent of juveniles disagreed with the statement, and 17.4 percent of the

respondents added that they did not know whether overcrowding cause disharmony at

jails. When responding to another statement about whether recreational services were

available to juveniles at jail, the majority of the respondents (i.e. 91.7 percent)

disagreed, 6.1 percent respondents agreed with the statement, and 2.3 percent

juveniles did not give their views. Asking about the disturbance of smooth

functioning of juveniles‘ lives due to jail life, most of the juveniles (i.e. 89.4 percent)

agreed with the statement that jail life disturbs the smooth life and personality of

juveniles while 8.3 percent juvenile respondents disagreed with the statement and 2.3

percent of juvenile respondents were of the opinion that they did not know about the

statement. Next, the majority (i.e. 91.7 percent) of juvenile respondents reported the

inadequacy medical care facilities, 7.6 percent respondents agreed that there were

153
proper medical care facilities provided to juveniles, and 0.8 percent juvenile

respondents did not express their views. When responding to a statement about the

availability of skill development programs at jail for juveniles, the majority of the

respondents (i.e. 93.2 percent) disagreed with the statement, 1.5 percent juveniles

agreed that there were skill development programs at the jail, and 5.3 percent did

share their views. Answering a statement about juveniles sleeping and living a relaxed

life at jail, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 96.2 percent) disagreed with

the statement, 2.3 percent juvenile respondents agreed, and 1.5 percent of respondents

did not share their opinion.

Table No. 4.2.4 Awareness and Problems Related to Delayed Justice System

Statement Agree Percentage Disagree Don’t know Total

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles have knowledge about the 02 1.5 76 57.6 54 40.9 132
rights and privileges provided under
the law/JJSO, 2000

Juveniles are happy with the 35 26.5 95 72.0 02 1.5 132

behavior of jail staff and police at
the time of conviction

Parents/guardian have the provision 126 95.5 02 1.5 04 3.0 132

to hire a lawyer for litigation of
their children/wards

Government provided free legal 01 0.8 126 95.5 05 3.8 132

counseling to juveniles

Delays in the justice process has 88 66.7 18 13.6 26 19.7 132

adverse effects on juveniles

The jail staff or police demand a 118 89.4 11 8.3 03 2.3 132
bribe in return foraccess to judge
Source: Field survey, 2016.

154
 Table No. 4.2.4 shows statistics about the delayed justice system of juvenile

cases. When asking about the knowledge of juveniles regarding the rights and

privileges provided under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO), 2000, the

majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 57.6 percent) disagreed with the statement,

1.5 percent juveniles agreed, and 40.9 percent of respondents were of the view that

they did not know either way about juveniles‘ understanding of the privileges under

JJSO, 2000. Furthermore, when juveniles were asked whether they were happy with

the behavior of jail police at the time of their conviction, the majority of the juvenile

respondents (i.e.72 percent) disagreed with the statement, 26.5 percent respondents

agreed, and 1.5 percent juveniles did not express their views. While discussing a

statement regarding hiring of lawyers by juveniles‘ parents, the majority of the

respondents (i.e. 95.5) percent agreed, 1.5 percent juveniles disagreed with the

statement, and 3.0 percent of juveniles did not express their views. Asking about free

legal counseling for juveniles, the majority of the juveniles (i.e. 95.5 percent)

disagreed with the statement, 0.8 percent juveniles agreed with the statement, and 3.8

percent of juvenile respondents did not know about the free legal counseling provided

by the government. Asking whether delays in the justice process had adverse effects

on the juveniles, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 66.7 percent) agreed

with the statement, 13.6 percent juvenile respondents disagreed with the statement,

and 19.7 percent of juveniles did not express their views. Responding to a statement

about whether jail staff or police demand a bribe in return for access to judge, the

majority (i.e. 89.4 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with the statement, 8.3

percent of the juvenile respondents disagreed, and 2.3 percent of respondents did not

know about bribe demanding by police.

155
Table No. 4.2.5 Exclusive Juvenile Courts and Associated Problems

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Frequency
Juvenile cases are tried at 124 93.9 05 3.8 03 2.3 132
the adult court

Juveniles are treated as 127 96.2 03 2.3 02 1.5 132

adult criminals in court

Juvenile cases in the courts 122 92.4 02 1.5 08 6.1 132

are heard publicly

Juveniles cases are tried 01 0.8 129 97.7 02 1.5 132

satisfactory in adult court

Juvenile suffered mentally 99 75.0 25 18.9 08 6.1 132

from the lengthy and costly
procedure of the courts

Recidivism rate may 89 67.4 36 27.3 07 5.3 132

increase with association of
juveniles with adult
criminals in courts
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.5 shows the figures about potential repercussions of the absence

of exclusive courts for juveniles. While discussing a statement about whether juvenile

cases were tried at the adult court, 93.9 percent of juvenile respondents agreed with

the statement that all cases of juveniles were tried in the adult courts, 3.8 percent of

juvenile respondents disagreed with the statement, and 2.3 percent juveniles did not

express their views on hearing of juvenile cases. When respondents were asked

whether juveniles were treated as adult criminals in court, the majority of the juvenile

respondents (i.e. 96.2 percent) agreed with the statement, 2.3 percent of juveniles

156
refuted the statement, and 1.5 percent of juveniles were unaware of how juveniles are

treated in adult courts. Furthermore, answering the question about whether juvenile

cases in the courts were heard publicly, 92.4 percent of the juvenile respondents

agreed with the statement, 1.5 percent of juveniles disagreed, and 6.1 percent of

juveniles did not express their views. Answering to a statement concerning whether

juvenile cases were tried in a satisfactory manner in adult courts, the majority of the

juvenile respondents (i.e. 97.7 percent) disagreed, 0.8 percent juveniles agreed, and

1.5 percent of juvenile respondents did not express their opinions. Moreover, asking

about whether juveniles suffered mentally from the lengthy procedure of the courts,

the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 75.0 percent) agreed that most of the

juvenile inmates suffered mentally, 18.9 percent respondents disagreed, and 6.1

percent of juvenile respondents said that they did not know about the statement. As

for whether the recidivism rate might increase due tothe association of juveniles with

adult criminals in the courts, the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 67.4

percent) agreed with the statement, 27.3 percent of juvenile respondents disagreed,

and 5.3 percent of juveniles did not share their views.

157
Table No. 4.2.6 Juveniles’ Relation with Gangsters and their Effects on them

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles interact frequently 115 87.1 12 9.1 05 3.8 132
with the adult criminals at
jail

The jail staff has proper 10 7.6 96 72.7 26 19.7 132

check and balance on the
interaction of juveniles with
adult criminals

Juveniles are frank with the 124 93.9 07 5.3 01 0.8 132
adult criminals at the jail

Juvenile prisoners are using 99 75.0 32 24.2 01 0.8 132

cigarettes, snuff, hashish or
marijuana, etc. at the jail

Adult criminals are giving 116 87.9 13 9.8 03 2.3 132

cigarette, snuff, hashish or
marijuana or cash money to
juveniles at jail

Juveniles have relations with 126 95.5 01 0.8 05 3.8 132

the gangs at jail

Cigarette, Naswar and 115 87.1 05 3.8 12 9.1 132

Marijuana are any time
available to the gangs

Juveniles join gangs because 111 84.1 18 13.6 34 25.8 132

of physical and financial
support
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.6 shows data regarding the relation of juveniles with gangsters.

Statements were posed about frequent interaction of juveniles with the adult criminals

at jail. The majority (i.e. 87.1 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with the

statement that they interacted with other prisoners at jail, 9.1 percent refuted the

158
statement, and 3.8 percent were unaware of interactions of juveniles with adults.

Answering a statement concerning whether the jail staff had proper checks and

balances on the interaction of juveniles with adult criminals, the majority (i.e. 72.7

percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with the statement that jail staff had no check

and balance over juveniles‘ interactions with adult criminals, whereas 7.6 percent

juveniles were agreed with the statement, and 19.7 percent respondents said that they

did not know. Asking about whether juveniles were frank with the adult criminals at

the jail, the majority (i.e. 93.9 percent) of respondents agreed with the statement while

5.3 percent of the respondents disproved the statement, whereas, 0.8 percent were of

the view that they did not know whether juveniles were frank with adult criminals or

not. Moreover, asking about the use of cigarette, snuff, cannabis or hashish and

marijuana, etc. by juveniles, the majority (i.e. 75.0 percent) of juvenile respondents

confirmed the statement that juvenile inmates used drugs in different forms, whereas

24.2 percent respondents were against the view and 0.8 percent were of the opinion

that they did not know about the use of drug by the juveniles at jail. A statement

regarding whether adult criminals were giving cigarette, snuff, cannabis or hashish

and marijuana or cash money to juveniles at jail, the majority (i.e. 87.9 percent) of

juvenile respondents agreed that adult criminals provided drugs to juvenile prisoners,

whereas 9.8 percent were against the statement and 2.3 percent said that they did not

know about the statement. Responding to the statement about juveniles and their

relations with the gangs at the jail, the majority (i.e. 95.5 percent) of respondents

agreed with the statement that juveniles had strong relations with adult prisoners and

gangsters at jail while 3.8 percent stated that they did not know, and 0.8 percent

respondents disagreed with the statement. Answering a statement regarding the

availability of cigarettes, naswar and marijuana to the gangs at jail, the majority (i.e.

159
87.1 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed, whereas 3.8 percent juveniles refuted

the statement and 9.1 percent juveniles were unaware about the availability of

cigarettes, naswar, and marijuana at the jail. While responding to a statement about

juveniles joining gangs because of physical and financial support, the majority (i.e.

84.1 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with the statement that most juveniles

who commit crimes belong to poor families, they are socially marginalized, and they

tend to have no financial support, while 13.6 percent respondents refuted the

statement and 25.8 percent juvenile respondents were of the view that they did not

know why juveniles in jail join gangs.

No. 4.2.7 Social Marginalization and Associated Factors

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Percentag

Percentag

Percentag
e

e
Juveniles are excluded from 68 51.5 22 16.7 42 31.8 132
social activities and then they
look for crimes

Juveniles experience 56 42.4 76 57.6 0 0 132

domestic violence before they
become criminal/delinquents

There are conflicting 35 26.5 79 59.8 18 13.6 132

situations in the area before
a juvenile commits a crime

Juveniles are not aware of 91 68.9 16 12.1 25 18.9 132

punishment before they
commit a crime

Juveniles are not afraid of 13 9.8 87 65.9 32 24.2 132

the consequences of a crime
Source: Field survey, 2016.

160
 Table No. 4.2.7 shows the data concerning the social marginalization of

juveniles. Juveniles were asked whether their social exclusion had impacted their

criminal activity and imprisonment; the majority (i.e. 51.5 percent) of respondents

agreed with the statement, whereas 16.7 percent were disagreed, and 31.8 percent

were of the view that they did not know about the statement. Answering a statement

about whether juveniles experience domestic violence before they become

criminal/delinquents, the majority (i.e. 57.6 percent) of respondents refuted the

statement whereas 42.4 percent agreed. When juveniles were asked whether there

were conflicting situations in their area before they committed crimes, the majority of

the juvenile respondents (i.e. 59.8 percent) disagreed with the statement, while 26.5

percent respondents agreed, and 13.6 percent of respondents stated that they did not

know about the statement. A statement regarding whether juveniles were aware of

punishment before they commit a crime, the majority (i.e. 68.9 percent) of

respondents agreed that most of the juveniles were not aware of the punishment prior

to committing a crime, whereas 12.1 percent juvenile respondents disapproved the

statement, and 18.9 percent of respondents were of the view that they did not know

about the statement. Furthermore, astatement regarding whether juveniles were not

afraid of the consequences of a crime, the majority (i.e. 65.9 percent) of respondents

disagreed with the statement while 9.8 percent of juveniles agreed, and 24.2 percent

respondents stated that they did not know whether juveniles were afraid or not.

161
Table No. 4.2.8 Recidivist Acts of Juveniles after their Release

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles were ever 46 34.8 86 65.2 00 00 132
arrested before they
were incarcerated for
the second time

Juveniles used drugs or 99 75.0 12 9.1 21 15.9 132

affiliated with gangs
before they became
incarcerated

The jail environment is 09 6.8 111 84.1 12 9.1 132

capable of reintegration
and rehabilitation of
juvenile prisoners

Juveniles were adjusted 11 8.3 120 90.9 01 0.8 132

and are living happily in
the jail culture

The imprisonments of 110 83.3 10 7.6 12 9.1 132

juveniles have weakened
their social bond with
the social institutions
like family and peer
groups etc.

The juveniles are 09 6.8 98 74.2 25 18.9 132

receiving support in the
jail life for their
reintegration into
society
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.8 represents the data regarding whether juveniles were ever

arrested before they were incarcerated for the second time. The majority (i.e. 65.2

percent) of the juvenile respondents refuted the statement while 34.8 percent

162
respondents agreed. Furthermore, as to the statement concerning whether juveniles

had used drugs before they were incarcerated, the majority (i.e. 75 percent) of

respondents approved the statement that they used drugs whereas 9.1 percent

disapproved the statement about whether juveniles used drugs and 15.9 percent

respondents were of the opinion that they did not know about the drugs used by

juveniles. Moreover, the statement was asked about whether the jail environment was

capable of reformation and rehabilitation of juvenile prisoners. The majority (i.e. 84.1

percent) of juvenile respondents denied this assertion while 6.8 percent juveniles

agreed, and 9.1 percent respondents stated that they did not know. Answering to a

question concerning whether juveniles were adjusted and were living happily at the

jail culture, the majority (i.e. 90.9 percent) of juvenile respondents refuted the

statement, whereas 8.3 percent respondents agreed with the statement and 0.8 percent

respondents were of the view that they did not know. Moreover, the statement

regarding whether the imprisonment of juveniles had weakened their social bond with

family and peer groups, etc., the majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 83.3

percent) agreed with the statement that incarceration of juveniles had weakened their

social bond with their family and peer group whereas 7.6 percent respondents denied

the statement and 9.1 percent respondents were of the view that they did not know.

Asking about whether juveniles were receiving support at the jail for their

reintegration into society, the majority (i.e. 74.2 percent) of juvenile respondents

disagreed with the statement, asserting that there was nothing present at jail for

rehabilitation and reintegration of juveniles, whereas 6.8 percent of respondents

agreed with the statement that jail staff and the religious teacher at jails support their

reintegration into society, while 18.9 percent respondents stated that they did not

know whether these supports were present at jails or not.

163
Table No. 4.2.9 Challenges to Psychological Well-being of Juveniles

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles are stressful 131 99.2 01 0.8 00 00 132
and depressed at the
jail

Juveniles’ 132 100 00 00 00 00 132

independence and
liberty before
incarceration were
affected due to jail life

Juveniles feel isolated 123 93.2 07 5.3 02 1.5 132

because of being cut
off from their family
and friends

Juveniles feel guilty or 101 76.5 26 19.7 05 3.8 132

shameful due to their
crime and jail life

Juveniles have ever 33 25.0 91 68.9 08 6.1 132

thought to commit
suicide

Juveniles cry or weep 110 83.3 14 10.6 08 6.1 132

if they get sad or
depressed
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.9 relates to the psychological well-being of juveniles at the jails

under study. When responding to a statement about whether juveniles were stressed

and depressed at the jail, the majority (i.e. 99.2 percent) of juvenile respondents

agreed that most of the juveniles were depressed at jail; whereas 0.8 percent juvenile

respondent refuted the statement. Furthermore, answering a statement concerning

whether juveniles‘ independence and liberty before incarceration were affected due to

164
jail life, all of the respondents agreed with the statement. Answering another

statement about whether juveniles feel isolated because of being cut off from their

family and friends, the majority (i.e. 93.2 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed that

due to jail life they felt cut off from society and their families where 5.3 percent

juvenile respondents disagreed, and 1.5 percent juvenile respondents did not know

about the statement. Furthermore, answering to a statement about whether juveniles

feel guilty or shameful due to their crime and jail life, the majority (i.e. 76.5 percent)

of juvenile respondents agreed with the statement that they feel guilty and shameful

over their crimes, whereas 19.7 percent respondents refuted the statement and 3.8

percent respondents were of the opinion that they did not know how to express their

views. When juveniles were asked if they had ever thought to commit suicide, the

majority of the respondents (i.e. 68.9 percent) denied the statement while 25 percent

juvenile respondents agreed with the statement and 6.1 percent juveniles did not

express their views regarding suicide. When juveniles were asked if they cry or weep

if they get sad or depressed, the majority (i.e. 83.3 percent) of juvenile respondents

agreed with the statement that they wept when they were depressed at jail, whereas

10.6 percent respondents were against the statement and 6.1 percent juvenile

respondents did not express their views.

165
Table No. 4.2.10 Vulnerability and Practice of Juveniles’ Sexual Abuse at Jails

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Juveniles are affected
physically at jail 104 78.8 24 18.2 04 3.0 132
Juveniles are affected
emotionally at jail 107 81.1 22 16.7 03 2.3 132
Juveniles are affected
socially at jail 120 90.9 11 8.3 01 0.8 132
There are transgender or
transsexual juveniles at 07 05.3 85 64.3 40 30.3 132
jail
Juveniles are abused
sexually at jail 110 83.3 19 14.4 03 2.3 132
Anyone from the
Juveniles has desired any 96 72.7 35 26.5 01 0.8 132
sexual activity
Adults have criminal and
sexual tendencies 70 53.0 50 37.9 12 9.1 132
Jail staff ever demanded
for sexual satisfaction 48 36.4 76 57.6 08 6.1 132
from juveniles (verbal +
oral + extreme sexual)
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.10 shows the data concerning sexual violence observed by the

juveniles in the premises of jail. Juveniles were asked whether they had been affected

physically at jail. The majority (i.e. 78.8 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with

the statement that they were affected physically, whereas 18.2 percent juvenile

respondents were against the statement and 3.0 percent juvenile respondents did not

respond to the statement. Answering the statement about whether juveniles were

affected emotionally at jail, the majority (i.e. 81.7 percent) of juvenile respondents

agreed while 16.7 percent juveniles disagreed with the statement and 2.3 percent

166
juvenile respondents did not express their views. Furthermore, the statement was

asked whether juveniles were affected socially at jail; the majority of the juvenile

respondents (i.e. 90.9 percent) approved the statement that yes, they were affected

socially at jails whereas 8.3 percent juvenile respondents refuted the statement and 0.8

percent juvenile respondents were unaware about whether juveniles were affected

socially in jail. Moreover, responding toa statement concerning whether there were

transgender or transsexual juveniles at jail, the majority (i.e. 64.3 percent) of the

juvenile respondents disagreed with the statement, whereas 30.3 percent juvenile

respondents were unaware, and 5.3 percent respondents agreed with the statement.

While discussing a statement about whether juveniles were abused sexually at jail, the

majority (i.e. 83.3 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with the statement that

most of the juveniles were abused sexually at the jail, whereas 14.4 percent juvenile

respondents were against the statement, and 2.3 percent respondents were of the view

that they did not know about sexual abuse at the jail. Answering the statement about

whether anyone from the juveniles had desired any sexual activity, the majority (i.e.

72.7 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed with the statement that other juveniles

desired and asked for sexual activity, whereas 26.5 percent juvenile respondents

disagreed and 0.8 percent of respondents were of the view that they did not know.

While discussing a statement whether adults had a criminal and sexual tendency, the

majority (i.e. 53.0 percent) of the juvenile respondents agreed while 37.9 percent

juvenile respondents disproved and 9.1 percent juvenile respondents were unaware. A

statement concerning whether jail staff ever demanded sexual satisfaction, the

majority (i.e. 57.6 percent) of juvenile respondents disagreed, whereas 36.4 percent

juveniles agreed and said that yes jail staff demanded sexual activity and 6.1 percent

juvenile respondents did not express their views.

167
Table No. 4.2.11 Health Care Facility at Jails

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
Frequency
Juveniles have physical 30 22.7 102 77.3 00 00 132
disabilities

Juveniles have mental health 66 50.0 65 49.2 01 0.8 132

issues

At jail, mental health care is 02 1.5 74 56.1 56 42.4 132

provided

Physical activities are there at 01 0.8 130 98.5 01 0.8 132

the jail

There is water purification 10 7.6 115 87.1 07 5.3 132

plant at jail

The ambulance service is 18 13.6 106 80.3 08 6.1 132

there to shift juvenile patients
from jail to hospital in the
care of ailment or serious
diseases
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.11 reveals the data about the availability of health facilities at

jail. A statement was asked about whether juveniles had physical disabilities at jail.

The majority of the juvenile respondents (i.e. 77.3 percent) denied the statement that

juveniles had physical disabilities, whereas 22.7 percent juveniles agreed.

Furthermore, the statement was asked regarding whether juveniles had mental health

issues. The majority (i.e. 50.0 percent) of juvenile respondents agreed that juveniles

had mental issues like tension, frustration, depression and anxiety, where 49.2 percent

respondents denied these assertions, and 0.8 percent juvenile respondents did not

convey their views. Moreover, responding to a statement about the availability of

168
mental health care services at jail, the majority (i.e. 56.1 percent) of respondents

disagreed with the statement that there were mental care facilities provided to them,

while 1.5 percent respondents agreed with the statement, and 42.2 percent respondents

did not utter their views. Answering a statement about whether physical activities

were there at jail, the majority (i.e. 98.5 percent) of juvenile respondents were against

the statement and said that there were no physical activities for juveniles, whereas 0.8

percent respondents were in favor of the statement, and the same percent of juveniles

did not express their views. Furthermore a statement was posed about whether there

was water purification plant at jail and if potable water were available any time at jail.

The majority (i.e. 87.1 percent) of juvenile respondents refuted the statement and

added that there were no water purificaion plants nor was potable clean water

provided to juveniles while 7.6 percent respondents agreed and only 5.3 percent did

not express their views about potable water. Answering a statement about whether

ambulance services were there to shift juvenile patients from jail to hospital in the

care of ailment or serious diseases, the majority (i.e. 80.3 percent) of juvenile

respondents disagreed that there was an ambulance present, whereas 13.6 percent of

juvenile respondents agreed and said that in serious cases juveniles were shifted from

jail to hospital, while 6.1 percent of juvenile were unaware about ambulance facilities

for juveniles at jail.

169
Table No. 4.2.12 Educational and Vocational Facilities at Jail

Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know Total

Percentage

Percentage

Percentage
Frequency

Frequency

Frequency

Frequency
A formal educational 01 00.8 111 84.1 20 15.2 132
facility is provided at
the jail

Madrassa educational 131 99.2 01 0.8 00 00 132

facility is provided at
the jail

Vocational educational 06 04.5 126 95.5 00 00 132

facility is provided at
the jail

After their releasefrom 89 67.4 29 22.0 14 10.6 132

jail, juveniles tend to
continue their formal
education

Juvenile’s education 99 75.0 31 23.5 02 01.5 132

has suffered due to jail
life
Source: Field survey, 2016.

Table No. 4.2.12 illustrates the data regarding the availability of education

facilities at the sampled jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The sampled respondents were

asked whether formal education facility was provided at the jail. The majority of the

juvenile respondents (i.e. 84.1 percent) refuted the statement, whereas 0.8 percent

juveniles agreed with the statement, and 15.2 percent juvenile respondents were

unaware whether formal education was offered in jails. Furthermore, respondents

were asked whether madrassa educational facility was provided at the jail. The

majority (i.e. 99.2 percent) of respondents agreed with the statement that yes, there

was religious education present in the jails, where 0.8 percent juvenile respondents

170
disagreed with the statement. Moreover, answering to a statement regarding the

availability of vocational education facility at the jail, the majority (i.e. 95.5 percent)

of juvenile respondents denied the statement, while 4.5 percent juveniles agreed.

While answering a statement about whether juveniles would continue their education

after their release from jail, the majority (i.e. 67.4 percent) of juvenile respondents

said that they would continue their education, where 22.0 percent juveniles disagreed

with the statement and 10.6 percent juveniles did not know if they would continue

their education after their release from jail. Answering another statement about

whether their education had suffered due to jail life, the majority (i.e. 75 percent) of

juvenile respondents agreed that their education had suffered, while 23.5 percent

juvenile respondents refuted that statement, and 1.5 percent juvenile respondents did

not know about whether their education had suffered.

171
 Analyses of Quantitative and Qualitative Data

4.3 Bi-Variate and Thematic Analyses

As per side by side approach, quantitative variables and related qualitative themes
have been analyzed followed by the comparison and resultant consonance and
inconsonance

4.3.1 Association between Living Condition of Jail and Well-being of Juveniles

Well-being of juveniles
Statement Agree Disagree Don‘t Total (%) Statistics
(%) (%) know (%)
Juveniles have separate Agree 04(3.0) 00 01(0.8) 05(3.8) (P=0.032)
beds at the jail Disagree 58(43.9) 56(42.4) 08(6.1) 122(92.4) (χ2=10.589)
Don‘t 00 05(3.8) 00 05(3.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles live in a Agree 60(45.5) 47(45.6) 08(6.1) 115(87.1) (p=0.005)
congested space Disagree 02(1.5) 14(10.6) 01(0.8) 17(12.9) (χ2=10.689)
Don‘t 00 00 00 00
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Foam/mat and blanket etc. Agree 04(3.0) 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 06(4.5) (p=0.002)
are provided at the jail Disagree 58(43.9) 60(45.5) 07(5.3) 125(94.7) (χ2=16.516)
Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Clean drinking water is Agree 00 06(4.5) 00 06(4.5) (p=0.000)
available at jail Disagree 62(47.0) 55(41.7) 07(5.3) 124(93.9) (χ2=34.902)
Don‘t 00 00 02(1.5) 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
There is enough water at Agree 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 03(2.3) 05(3.8) (p=0.000)
the jail for cleaning Disagree 60(45.5) 59(44.7) 06(4.5) 125(94.7) (χ2=23.206)
purposes
Don‘t 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles are satisfied Agree 19(14.4) 09(6.8) 00 28(21.2) (p= 0.000)
with the toilet facility at Disagree 43(32.6) 52(39.4) 08(6.1) 103(78.0) (χ2=20.517)
the jail Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles are satisfied Agree 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 01(0.8) 04(3.0) (p=0.003)
with the food provided at Disagree 61(46.2) 59(44.7) 07(5.3) 127(96.2) (χ2=16.380)
the jail Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Sanitation arrangement is Agree 42(67.7) 43(70.5) 03(33.3) 88(66.7) (p=0.263)
satisfactory at jail Disagree 05(8.1) 04(6.6) 01(11.1) 10(7.6) (χ2=05.244)
Don‘t 15(24.2) 14(23.0) 05(55.6) 34(25.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
They were exposed to Agree 61(46.2) 58(43.9) 06(4.5) 125(94.7) (p=0.000)
different diseases due to Disagree 00 00 00 00 (χ2=15.780)
unhygienic and even lack Don‘t 01(0.8) 03(2.3) 03(2.3) 07(5.3)
of food. Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)

172
Proper windows are there Agree 49(37.1) 54(40.9) 08(6.1) 111(84.1) (p=0.643)
2
at jail Disagree 12(9.1) 06(4.5) 01(0.8) 19(14.4) (χ =2.510)
Don‘t 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The figure in the table denotes the frequency while the figure in parenthesis denotes
percentage. The symbol (P) represents the significance level and (χ2) represents the value of
chi square.

Table No. 4.3.1 is about living conditions in the sampled jails in Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa. A significant (p=0.032) association was found between the living

conditions and well-being of juvenile inmates as they were not provided with separate

beds at sampled jails. Similarly, a significant (p=0.005) association was found

between the well-being of juvenile inmates and congested space at the jails, which

was due to over-crowdedness situation. Juvenile inmates were not provided with

bedding facility like foam and blankets whereas a significant association (p=0.002)

was found of these things with the well-being of juveniles that they did not provided

bedding, foam and blankets for sleeping purpose.

Furthermore, clean and filtered drinking water was not provided to juvenile

inmates yet a high significant (p=0.000) association was found with the well-being of

juveniles at jail. Moreover, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was found with

the availability of enough water at jail for cleaning purposes. It shows that jail

authorities failed to provide clean and sufficient water to juvenile inmates.

Furthermore, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was observed with the

satisfaction of toilet facility at the jail. Data shows that there was no toilet facility in

the sampled jails as most of them used a single toilet at a time which was against the

prison rules. Moreover, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was found with the

food provided at jails for juvenile prisoners as they were not provided nutritional and

hygienic food. It is further added that inmates complained frequently about sub-

standard food, but no action was taken to improve the food standard. A non-

173
significant (p=0.263) association was found with the sanitation arrangement. It is

concluded from the above results that sanitation arrangement was good at the jails but

had no association with the well-being of juveniles.

A highly significant (p=0.000) association was found with juveniles were

exposed to different diseases due to unhygienic and even lack of food., which were

considered as too dangerous for human health. The ventilation system was good but

anon-significant (p=0.643) association was found with a statement regarding fresh air

facility at jail. All sampled jails had windows for the purpose.

The findings of the table no 4.3.1 shows that juvenile prisoners faced

numerous problems including the non-availability of a separate bed, foam and

blankets, etc. Clean water for drinking and bathing purpose was not enough and

juveniles were not able to bathe for many days, there were no proper toilets and not

enough hygienic and nutritious food provided to them. They become ill due to lack of

proper food and no proper treatment provided to juvenile inmates.

Analysis of Qualitative Data

Concurrent Triangulation Strategy is chosen when variables are establish and

further exploration of these variables through the qualitative method of investigation

takes the shape of themes. The quantitative variables in this study have been assumed

as the themes of qualitative data.

Living Conditions (Theme)

Data from Juvenile Prisoners

Living conditions includes basic attributes such as food, shelter, clothes,

water, space, sleeping area etc. The living condition of sampled jails was very poor

due to lack of basic facilities for the prisoners, particularly for the juvenile prisoners.

174
The majority (i.e. 18) of juvenile participants reported that the existing conditions of

the jails for juvenile inmates were very poor and they lived in a hazardous situation.

There were no proper beds and foams for them; they used to sleep on hard mats lying

on the floor. They complained of no proper place for sleeping as the number of

accommodated inmates was beyond the allocated space. Contaminated drinking water

and sub-standard food were a source of disease.

One participant, Jamal from Peshawar Central Jail, said:

―The food given to juvenile prisoners is not hygienic enough. The meal

is rotten and we could not eat it. Tea for fifty to sixty juveniles is

prepared in one-liter milk pack‖.

Jamal viewed that the food given to juvenile inmates was not hygienic.

Similarly, clean drinking water was not provided to them. According to the

participants, when juvenile prisoners eat the food and drink water, it caused severe

kinds of diseases and further, he supported his statement regarding tea he said that the

jail staff were preparing tea for fifty to sixty juveniles using only one liter of milk.

Some of the participants were of the view that juvenile inmates lived in

congested space as 60 juvenile prisoners were accommodated in one room called

Munda Khana (a place for young inmates). There was one ceiling fan for the entire

room and an alarming situation was that they used to sleep on mats close to each

other, therefore providing the opportunity for sexual abuse.

Living Condition Theme of Legal Counsels

Legal counsels viewed the existing conditions of jails as totally bad for

juveniles. They observed sub-standard food, lack of proper sleeping mats;

175
contaminated drinking water with a black color and improper toilet facilities

whenever they visited prisons for the purpose of meeting their juvenile clients. Some

of the lawyers added that juvenile inmates start crying and complaining of living

environments detrimental to their health.

One of the interviewee from the group of legal counsels, said,

―There are no medical facilities provided to juvenile prisoners at the

jail, a medical doctor is present but he hasn't performed his duty and

nor they provided medicines to juvenile inmates‖.

One of the interviewee from the group of interviewed legal counsels was of

the estimation that there were no medical facilities provided to juvenile prisoners;

their clients said them that only one type of tablet was provided to them for all kinds

of diseases. He further added that a medical doctor was available at jail, but he was

not assigned to treat the juvenile prisoners. Legal counsels further reported that the

jail staff was involved in corruption, they had no checks and balances in place, and

the existing government was failing to implement the JJSO.

Data from Probation Officers

Probation officers visited and analyzed the condition of juvenile inmates at

jails. The majority of the participants were of the view that juveniles lived in

hazardous situations and had no basic facilities at jail. The living condition of jails

was not up to the standard; there were no place for juveniles to sleep due to over-

crowdedness. Every day, prisoners are sent to jails that lack the space to house more

prisoners. Juvenile prisoners lived in the same jails with adult prisoners, which were

against the condition of JJSO, 2000, there were no beds for them, they were sleeping

on hard mats and some of them were sleeping in the toilets. Some of the probation

176
officers were of the opinion that food provided to juveniles was not good and healthy

and also the drinking water was not purified. Juveniles lived in the same jails with

adult prisoners and they learn negative acts from them. Therefore, when juveniles are

released from jails, they become dangerous for society and involved in more negative

activities and become recidivists. Some of the participants added that health facilities

at jails were not good and juveniles faced severe diseases. There was no ambulance to

shift serious patients to hospitals. Educational facilities were also not present at jails;

there was no proper schooling system, nor there were proper teachers for formal

academic education, but Madrassa education was provided by the religious teacher

and also teaches ethics to juvenile inmates. Few of the interviewees were of the view

that due to the lack of Borstal Institutions and the tendency of courts to jail juveniles

rather than releasing them on probation, juvenile inmates are sent to adult jails where

jail staff do not treat them properly--usually they beat them and use harsh and abusive

language.

One of the probation officers added,

―Jail is not the proper institution for the socialization and rehabilitation

of juvenile prisoners; they become more dangerous criminals and

recidivist. The juvenile inmates who are on probation period are

decent, follow the norms of society, take care of their parents,

rehabilitate quickly and are not involved in negative activities in the

supervision of probation officers‖.

The probation officer was of the view that juvenile prisoners who were on

probation periods instead at jail, were able engage in positive and productive

activities. Probation officers visited to their homes and asked their parents, neighbors

177
and friends that juveniles again, not commit any crime and also required that juveniles

come to the office of probation officers in the defined time. Parents also guide their

children to avoid negative activities like drugs, robbery and sexual activities, etc.

According to the probation officers, when comparing juveniles on probation and

juveniles sent to jail, there were huge differences in these two groups. The juvenile

inmates sent to jail were more violent and recidivist as opposed to juveniles who were

on probation. Probation officers were of the view that judges should, as a rule, release

juveniles on probation. They felt that probation is the progressive way to assure that

juveniles refrain from future involvement in crimes. By keeping juveniles out of jails,

they are prevented from learning from adult criminals. Probation officers in this study

believe that probation is the right way to rehabilitate juveniles.

Data from Jail Staff

Hygiene is a set of practices performed for the preservation of health.

According to the World Health Organization, "Hygiene refers to conditions and

practices that help to maintain health and prevent the spread of diseases". Maintaining

good living conditions entails providing a better environment; this upgrades the lives

of people. Similarly, decent living conditions must be considered in jails, where

delinquents are meant to be treated in such a way that they became good members of

the state. In this regard, certain hygienic measures should be taken to improve the

lives of the delinquents. These conditions may include pure water, sanitation, quality

food, washroom facilities and the list goes on. Here in the qualitative portion of the

study, the researcher‘s first approach was juvenile inmates; they were interviewed

about the hygienic conditions in the jails they occupied. After taking data from the

juvenile prisoners, the researcher then approached to the jail staff in order to find their

178
opinion with respect to jail hygienic conditions. The majority (i.e. nine) participants

from the jail staff were of the view that hygienic conditions were good. Jail staff

believed that they tried their best to provide enough hygienic facilities to juvenile

prisoners at jails. Participants were of the view that they provide clean and filtered

drinking and bathing water. Four of the jail staff said that there were proper tube wells

at the jails. They further added that at jail, food like in a five-star hotel was not

provided, but clean, nutritious and hygienic food was given to the prisoners and, they

added, the jail staff also eats that food. Some of the jail staff illustrated that sanitation

system at jails was very good; there was no stagnant water in the facility. Toilets were

cleaned and enough for them and once a week, the toilets were cleaned with acid.

Juveniles (Mundagan) were housed in a separate barrack called Munda Khana where

no one was allowed. They said that juvenile prisoners were happy with each other and

jail authorities provided fans and television. Of the jail staff, three of the participants

said that the lighting system in Munda Khana was very good; there were windows for

fresh air and for sunlight. Furthermore, the jail staff added that due to overcrowding,

juvenile inmates were not provided separate beds so they were sleeping on mats on

hard floor near to each other. Juvenile prisoners had no separate jail so adult, women

and juvenile prisoners were living in the same jails, but they had separate barracks,

and according to jail staff, they never met with each other.

One of the members of jail staff, Liaqat added:

―We are providing quality food and pure drinking water to juveniles.

Food is checked while serving with them. While there is also a food

menu in which different kinds of food are given to them on different

days of week at jail‖.

179
 Jail staff strongly opposed the argument supported by the juvenile prisoners

that there was Lack of proper food provided to them at jail. Jail staff were of the view

that the food was prepared under the proper supervision of the jail authority. The food

menu was prepared by the jail authority to provide different meals and also filtered

clean water to juvenile inmates.

One of the participants from the jail staff, Izhar, said:

―The sanitation facilities are better at jails. There is no blockage of

water in the cells and washrooms. The cells are well designed and the

lighting and ventilation system are kept under consideration‖.

Izhar explained that at jail the water and sanitation facilities were very good.

The jail staff takes care of these and the upper authority checks the cells once a

month. There was no stagnant water at jail because if staff were to ignore stagnant

water, mosquitoes and flies could cause many diseases to the prisoners; for this

reason, Izhar said that the jail staff tried their best to keep the jail clean. Asked about

the lighting and ventilation system in the cells, Izhar added that the ventilation system

was good; the cells were not covered fully, and the fresh air comes easily. Also,

windows and sky lights were there for fresh air and lighting so that if any one of the

juvenile prisoners wanted to study or engage with other works that they would not

face any problem from poor lighting.

Another respondent, Rehman, said:

―Prisoners are more in number and space at jail is limited due to over

crowdedness mostly prisoners especially juvenile inmates lived in a

congested space and sleep on mats very near to each other‖.

180
 Rehman was of the opinion that jail provided poor living conditions in the

sense that the number of prisoners was not ideal compared to the available space at

jail. Due to overcrowding, more problems were created at jail such as toilet problems,

lack of clean drinking water, poor health, lack of education, and sleeping and

recreational problems. There was no bedding system for the juveniles; they were

sleeping on mats. In fact, some days when there was an excess of juvenile prisoners,

there was no space for sleeping.

Discussion on Living Conditions of Juveniles

It is evident from both quantitative and qualitative data collected from all

stakeholders of the justice system that living conditions were critical at all sampled

jails in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The juvenile prisoners were not provided with clean

drinking water, standard food, clean toilets and proper bedding at sampled jails. All

agents of the justice system except jail staff endorsed the existence of poor living

conditions at the jails. Because they were responsible for ensuring the hygienic

atmosphere, the jail staff argued that the condition of facilities that housed the

juvenile prisoners was safe and hygienic, while legal counsels and probation officers

pointed out numerous hazardous conditions.

Consonant Views of Juveniles (Quantitative) with Agents of the Justice System

(Qualitative)

According to the table No. 4.3.1 Living condition of the sampled jails of

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, was too critical. While discussing the living conditions, the

juvenile inmates reported that there were no separate beds at the sampled jails.

Similarly, they also lived in a congested space where mattresses and blankets were not

provided to them. It shows that they lived hazardous life with no such

accommodations or basic comforts such as foam pads, blankets or bedding.

181
Furthermore, they lived in a congested space due to over crowding in the sampled

jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Qualitative data collected from all the agents of the

justice system confirmed the above findings of quantitative data. Rodriguez (2007)

concluded the same findings and stressed the need for separate beds and separate

rooms for each prisoner in a jail. He also supported the provision of all basic facilities

to the prisoners which the present study mentions as not available in KP jails. The

International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) (2012) and the report of the U.S.

Department of State (2013) are also in line with this finding. The ICRC and U.S.

Department of State contend that prisoners must have sufficient space and

environment for sleeping and the jail staff should provide the basic facilities to

prisoners like foam/mat, pillow etc. during the night in individual cells. Apart from

these accommodations, these rules also specify that if a prisoner wants to share his/her

room to another prisoner with their own will he/she will be allowed to share their

room with other prisoners including juveniles.

Juvenile inmates were also not satisfied with the toilet facilities in the jails

under study. The study findings further show that juveniles faced numerous problems

at the time they were using the toilet. All of the stakeholders interviewed for this

study confirmed the fact that sampled jails were overcrowded and the number of the

toilets was not sufficient nor were they of decent quality. They further added that

water supply to the toilets was also not satisfactory. Here, the jail staff agreed with

juveniles‘ opinions about problems relating to toilet facilities, stating that the problem

of inadequate toilet facilities was due to prison overcrowding. The legal counsels and

probation officers had referred to the provision of toilet facility for juveniles under

JJSO and they had demanded that prison officials address their objection as provided

in JJSO, 2000. According to the ICRC (2012), there should be a minimum of one

182
toilet per 25 prisoners available at all times within or near to the cell. Furthermore,

ICRC suggests that each cell should have at least one toilet.

Karnam (2007-08) referred to insufficient facilities at Indian jails where 75

prisoners must use a single toilet and even some jails did not have toilet facilities. The

findings of ICRC (2012) are in contrast to Karnam‘s study, as the ICRC report

indicates the existence of basic facilities for prisoners in Indian prisons. Karnam‘s

findings support the results of the above data demonstrating that there were no proper

toilets for prisoners. There were no basic facilities and especially toilets, which were

mentioned in the provisions of ICRC.

The quantitative data taken from juvenile inmates and qualitative data

provided by probation officers, legal counsels, juvenile prisoners and jail staff

revealed shared opinions about the sanitation system. All of the stakeholders were of

the view that there was no problem of sanitation at jails. They properly managed the

sanitation system and there was no problem of stagnant water at the jails. According

to ICRC (2012), there are no international rules for running water at the jails, but still

the ICRC suggests that prisoners should have easy access to water in prisons.

Although Karnam (2007-08) found that there were severe sanitation problems faced

by juvenile prisoners in India, the above results of the quantitative and qualitative data

suggest that the sanitation systems in the sampled jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was

good.

Quantitative and qualitative data taken from all targeted groups agreed upon

the existence of fresh air and lighting systems in jail barracks. Windows were

provided ample fresh air from outside. The findings of EPR (2006) support the above

findings. According to EPR, in order to assure the entrance of light and fresh air,

183
windows are essential to the prison infrastructure. The international rules are more

interested in the size and position of the windows through which the prisoners can see

the outer atmosphere from the cell. According to the United Nations, windows must

be constructed so that the fresh air and light can enter easily and the prisoner can work

and study at the cell.

Inconsonant views of Juvenile Inmates, Probation Officers and Legal Counsels

with the Jail Staff

Both quantitative data from juvenile prisoners and qualitative data from

targeted groups except jail staff were on the same page about the lack of availability

of clean drinking water for the prisoners in sampled jails. The jail staff appeared to

defend the quality of the water mainly because supplying this resource was included

in their responsibilities. Had they accepted the non-availability of drinking water,

would directly point the finger at their failure. These findings are supported by

European Prison Rule (EPR) (2006), which has laid down the principle of availability

of sufficient clean water in prisons in order to enable every prisoner to fulfill the

needs of nature in a clean and decent way. The Council of Europe stressed the

importance of access of prisoners to clean water, i.e. to provide clean water and give

respect to the personal life of the offenders.

Moreover, adequate supplies of water for the cleaning of laundry and for

bathing purposes were also observed as lacking. Quantitative and qualitative findings

of all groups except jail staff confirmed it. Unclean water caused skin diseases to the

juvenile prisoners. Jail staff rejected the claims of juvenile prisoners and other groups

about the non-availability of clean water. They further added that they had their own

tube well at the jail. Karnam‘s study conducted in 2007-08 is in line to the findings of

184
this study. It reflects a miserable state of Indian jails where clean water was short.

Prisoners would take a bath only after weeks and months had passed, which caused

skin problems.

Qualitative data reveals that all stakeholders except jail staff were of the view

that juvenile prisoners were not provided hygienic and nutritious food. Juvenile

inmates, legal counsels, and probation officers reported that food provided to juvenile

inmates were mostly rotten. Some of the juvenile participants said that jail staff

provided very poor and un-hygienic tea. In contrast toall agents of the justice system,

the jail staff maintained that juvenile prisoners blame them. They further added that

there are some members for checks and balances over food. In short, the results of the

quantitative and qualitative data were in conformity with each other except for the

data provided by jail staff. According to the U.S. Department of State (2013),

Amnesty International has reported that food is the basic need for living human

beings, but jail staff at the jails under study failed to provide nutritious and hygienic

food to the prisoners at their jails. They provided very poor food to prisoners, which

are considered the degradation of a human being. Jail staff further added that most of

the jails have a very limited budget for a limited number of prisoners, but at jails

prisoners are more numerous than the budgets allow for. Therefore, due to the limited

budget, jail staff provided limited meals to inmates. The admission by jail staff that

there was not enough food to feed all of the prisoners supports the findings of the

above data that juveniles were not satisfied with the food provided to them. The

results show that jail staff had not provided hygienic, nutritious, and adequate food to

their juvenile prisoners.

185
 The prevalence of disease(s) injuvenile prisoners was due to the lack of

sufficient food and clean drinking water. All agents of the justice system except jail

staff confirmed that most of the diseases found in juvenile inmates were due to the

rotten/expired food and contaminated water. Jail staff admitted that there was no

check and balance over this. Probation officers and legal counsels were of the view

that they had complained to jail authority about the lack of food but jail authorities did

not take any action. According to jail staff fresh and nutritious food was provided to

juvenile prisoners. They further added that jail staff also eats the same food provided

to the prisoners. The results supported by the findings of the International Crises

Group (2011) mention severe problems of health and some hazardous diseases existed

in the prison due to unhygienic and expired food. Another study conducted by HRCP

in (2014), which refers to Pakistani jails, points out the poor condition of juvenile

prisoners. They are facing many problems at jails like poor living conditions in jails

and the lacking food cause different types of diseases. It is concluded from the above

discussion that most of the diseases were caused by poor food and water; even after

receiving complaints from justice system officials, the jail authorities did not take any

action.

From the whole discussion on the variable, it is concluded that the previous

literature supports the results of the study. The findings of the quantitative table no.

4.3.1 and qualitative data illustrate numerous problems faced by juvenile prisoners at

the sampled jails. They had no separate beds; they lived in a congested space at the

jail. There were no foam/mattresses and blankets provided to juvenile inmates. The

drainage system was all right, however proper toilets were not available. Proper

hygienic food was not provided to juvenile inmates and different diseases were

present due to lack of proper food.

186
 4.3.2 Association between Attitude of Jail Staff and Well-being of juveniles

Well-being of juvenile Prisoners

Statement Agree Disagree Don‘t Total Statistics
(%) (%) know (%) (%)
Jail staff fairly deals with Agree 03(2.3) 06(4.5) 00 09(6.8) (p=0.000)
juveniles Disagree 58(43.9) 53(40.2) 06(4.5) 117(88.6) (χ2=20.262)
Don‘t 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3) 06(4.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Jail staff is promoting the Agree 03(2.3) 08(6.1) 00 11(8.3) (p=0.000)
welfare of juveniles Disagree 59(44.7) 52(39.4) 07(5.3) 118(89.4) (χ2=21.093)
Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Rehabilitative and Agree 00 02(1.5) 00 02(1.5) (p=0.000)
correctional facilities are Disagree 62(47.0) 58(43.9) 07(5.3) 127(96.2) (χ2=20.023)
available at jail for Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
juveniles Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Cruel humiliating Agree 50(37.9) 42(31.8) 04(3.0) 96(72.7) (p= 0.000)
practices are carried out at Disagree 02(1.5) 15(11.4) 01(0.8) 18(13.6) (χ2=20.776)
jail Don‘t 10(7.6) 04(3.0) 04(3.0) 18(13.6)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Penalty at jail has negative Agree 51(38.6) 39(29.5) 03(2.3) 91(68.9) (p=0.000)
effects on juveniles Disagree 04(3.0) 11(8.3) 00 15(11.4) (χ2=21.338

Don‘t 07(5.3) 11(8.3) 06(4.5) 24(18.2)

Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Unhealthy behavior of Agree 51(38.6) 40(30.3) 03(2.3) 94(71.2) (p=0.000)
staff promotes criminal Disagree 03(2.3) 10(7.6) 00 13(9.8) (χ2=20.311)
tendencies at jail Don‘t 08(6.1) 11(8.3) 06(4.5) 25(18.9)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Jail staff demands bribe Agree 54(40.9) 42(31.8) 06(4.5) 102(77.3) (p=0.035)
when juveniles need Disagree 05(3.8) 15(11.4) 01(0.8) 21(15.9) (χ2=10.378)
something Don‘t 03(2.3) 04(3.0) 02(1.5) 09(6.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juvenile have access to Agree 02(1.5) 02(1.5) 02(1.5) 06(4.5) (p=0.000)
legal counsels, probation Disagree 48(36.4) 59(44.7) 06(4.5) 113(85.6) (χ2=20.094)
officers and parents easily Don‘t 12(9.1) 00 01(0.8) 13(9.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Jail staff teaches Agree 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5) 03(2.3) (p=0.000)
ethics/manners to Disagree 61(46.2) 57(43.2) 07(5.3) 125(94.7) (χ2=22.292)
juveniles Don‘t 00 04(3.0) 00 04(3.0)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The figures in the table denote frequency while figures in parenthesis denote percentage. The symbol
(P) represents the significance level and (χ2) represents the value of chi square.

187
 Table No. 4.3.2 reflects the results of variable of jail staff‘s attitude towards

juvenile inmates in the sampled jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. It was observed that the

attitude of jail staff was not fair, beyond the spirit of welfare and punitive in a harsh

and cruel manner towards the juvenile inmates, as explicated through high significant

association (p=0.000).

Furthermore, most of the juvenile inmates were of the view that jail staff not

promoted the welfare of the juveniles. A high significant association (p=0.000)

observed with the well-being of the juvenile prisoners.

It was observed that at jail there were no corrective and rehabilitative facilities

provided to juveniles where a highly significant association (p=0.000) was found with

well-being of juveniles. Furthermore, it was observed that jail staff beat juvenile

inmates where a high significant association (p=0.000) was found with cruel and

humiliating practices were carried out at jail.

Furthermore, it was observed that penalties and harsh attitudes by jail staff had

negative consequences over the personality of juvenile inmates, where a highly

significant association (p=0.000) was found.

The attitude of jail staff negatively impacted juvenile inmates‘ personalities;

criminal tendency enhancement; and learning unethical language. The data revealed a

high significant association (p=0.000) in this respect.

The most dismal picture was portrayed in the form of corruption as the jail

staff demanded bribes in exchange for access to legal entities and parents. A

significant relation of the variable was found with significant value (p=0.035). The

data further reveal that the juvenile inmates did not have easy access to the legal

188
counsels, probation officers and parents. They complained of jail staff taking bribes

whenever their parents or other family members wanted to meet them at jails. These

statements were also supported with a highly significant association (p=0.000). In the

last statement it was observed that jail staff did not teach ethics and norms to juvenile

prisoners at jail where a highly significant association (p=0.000) was found.

It is concluded on the basis of study findings on the variable discussed, that

the attitude of jail staff did not remain fair and cooperative; rather the inmates were

beaten badly and they experienced filthy language which adversely affected their

personalities.

Attitude of Jail Staff towards Juvenile prisoners (Theme)

Data from Juvenile Prisoners

Fair dealing of jail staff with juvenile prisoners is necessary for sound

personality development. Different aspects of the attitude of jail staff were analyzed

through qualitative data. The majority of the juvenile respondents (18 out of 20)

regarded the attitude of the jail staff as not good because they always used abusive

and harsh language with juvenile prisoners. They charged jail staff for demanding sex

with juvenile inmates and reported that when they denied these demands, they were

beaten and subjected to harsh treatment. Nine out of twenty juveniles reported that jail

staff took bribes from the adult prisoners in order to be allowed to access Munda

Khana (a place for juvenile prisoners) at night time for sexual practices with juvenile

inmates. Juvenile inmates further complained that jail staff did not allow their parents

or other relatives to meet them at jails without giving a bribe to the jail staff. Four out

of twenty juvenile participants said that they did not know anything about drugs prior

to their incarceration but jail life introduced them to different kinds of drugs as staff

sold these drugs to adults and also to juvenile inmates. Although jails in Pakistan are

189
meant to reform behavior, juvenile inmates are treated like animals in the jails under

study. Thirteen juvenile inmates said that rehabilitation, reformation, welfare and

counseling of juvenile prisoners were not possible at jails. Seven of the juveniles were

of the opinion that due to harsh attitudes of jail staff, most of their friends become

criminals as they learnt new patterns of crime in jail environment and they became

recidivist after they were released from jail.

One juvenile prisoner, Izhar, stated that:

―The attitude of jail staff is very negative as they sexually

abuse juveniles. One of the jail staff forced me for sexual
activity when I refused he beat me, I complained to the higher
authority, they put my mouth shut with dire consequences if
disclosed it to someone‖.

Juveniles added that they were afraid of sharing their feelings with anyone

because if jail staff knows about it, they would experience a very bad time at jail.

Another juvenile interviewee Javed, reported that a member of jail personnel sexually

abused him by force after he had previously refused this ugly desire. This was

followed by a harsh beating and threat of dire consequence on disclosure of the rape.

He further added that almost all jail staff were involved in sexual activities with

juvenile inmates as they were prone to immoral practices. Also, jail staff kept each

other‘s confidences about these illegal practices. Apart from sexual abuse at the hands

of jail staff, juvenile inmates were also sexually exploited by adult prisoners who

raped them after bribing the jail staff in order to enter Munda Khana. Sixteen minor

inmates reported that the jail staff has converted the status of lockup into a place of

sex indulgence instead of its basic purpose of rehabilitation. This situation has led to a

deterioration of juvenile inmates‘ personality and has reinforced their criminal

behavior.

190
Another participant, Imran, said:
―I was not addicted to cigarette and other drugs before I was
incarcerated. In the beginning, I couldn‘t get cigarette and
drugs but later I came to know that jail staff is providing these
things. Now, they are providing cigarette and other drugs for
giving money as bribe‖.

Results from the quantitative survey and qualitative interviews make it

obvious that the jail staff is involved in supplying drugs to the prisoners on demand of

either cash money or other unethical desire. This respondent‘s interview shows that

jail inmates have actually become addicted in jail beyond the charges they were

locked up for. It means that the higher authority was reluctant to take disciplinary

action against jail personnel; rather jail staff supports their colleagues and prevents

those affected from opening their mouth against immoral acts. Instead of

rehabilitating criminal behavior and discouraging criminal tendency, the jail staff‘s

abusive actions and attitudes combined with the lack of action from higher-ups are

more likely to promote immoral acts.

Data from Legal Counsels

Legal counsels are related to juvenile inmates because they are defending their

cases at courts. Legal counsels are allowed to be in touch with their inmate clients at

jails. The majority (08 out of 10) of counsels complained that jail staff normally

hesitated in allowing juvenile inmates to meet with their lawyers at jail. They

supported the complaint of juveniles regarding bribe taken by the jail staff when they

wanted to meet their wards/children.

191
Few of the legal counsels reported:
―Juvenile inmates are facing lot of problems including jail staff‘s
vulgar language and physical punishment. Inmates are also living life
without basic facility‖.

Their statements reflected that juvenile inmates were beaten with sticks and

rubber and they also faced vulgar languages. It is clear to say that negative/harsh

behavior impacts juvenile personality development, which further promotes criminal

tendency.

Data from Probation Officers

Probation officers were of the opinion that the attitude of jail staff was not good;

juvenile inmates were not fairly dealt with and staff treated prisoners like animals. Jail

staff punished juvenile inmates inhumanely and did not pay any attention to

rehabilitative activities and skill development programs at jails. Jail staff beat juvenile

prisoners in a humiliating manner which portrays an inhuman treatment in 21st century.

Probation officers were concerned that the impaired personality of juvenile inmates

would worsen as inhumane behavior towards them remained in place.

One of the probation officers, Aslam, said:

―Jail environment illustrates that it is not for correction of juvenile

inmates rather it is the factory of criminals by producing dangerous

and well-trained criminals. It will not be wrong to say that jails have

taken the shape of nursery for criminals and are helpful in providing

criminals to various gangs involved in criminal activities‖.

Probation officer, Aslam, held the opinion that jail life has been depicting an

ugly picture of cruelty and inhuman practices. He further argued that behavior

reformation is essential at jail and for that purpose; flexible behavior needs to be

192
adopted towards juveniles. He maintained that release of juvenile inmates on

probation is the right way to socialize, rehabilitate and educate them with proper

counseling. As mentioned earlier, juveniles on probation experienced positive results

and were thriving, as opposed to those who were placed in jails. He observed that the

recidivism rate for juveniles who had completed probation was less than those who

had served time in jail.

Data from Jail Staff

Making sure to punish the crime and not the criminal is the major philosophy

behind reintegrating offenders into the social fabric. The role of jail staff is crucial in

this respect and they are supposed to play that role in a positive manner. The majority,

seven out of ten, staff visualized their attitude with the juvenile inmates‘ as positive in

regard to facilitating them in the best way within available resources. They further

added that jail staff take care of inmates‘ health, recreation and education and have

also provided indoor facilities for recreation like television, ludo, careem board and

badminton. They said that educational facilities have been provided to juvenile

inmates even academic books for study and qualified jail staff to teach them.

Madrassa education has also been provided to juveniles; religious teachers come to

the jail for the purpose.

One of the staff members, Tauqir, stated that:

―We have positive attitude with the juveniles. We are treating them

like our own children. We often punish them for wrong doing in order

to maintain their positive behavior‖.

He maintained that punishment of juvenile prisoners was not allowed because

the higher authority takes serious exception to it. He said that different NGOs

193
arranged orientation classes for jail staff about ethical issues and dealing with

manners. He endorsed punishment only to the juvenile inmates who are engaged in

negative activities. They denied the practice of sex with juvenile inmates in the jails.

It became clear that jail staff denied the infliction of punishment on all juvenile

inmates but insisted that they only punished those who remained involved in negative

activities.

Discussion on Attitude of Jail Staff towards Juvenile Prisoners

On the basis of both quantitative and qualitative data taken from all target

groups except jail staff, stakeholders mentioned that the attitude of jail staff was not

fair and cooperative with the juvenile inmates. All the groups mentioned in preceding

sections confirmed the malpractice of sexual abuse with juveniles by the jail staff as

well as adult prisoners who illegally enter the Munda Khana (an exclusive barrack for

juvenile prisoners) at night time with the support of jail staff who are bribed with cash

money or other valuables. However, the jail staff denied the occurrence of sexual

abuse or harassment at jails. They also refuted claims that harsh physical punishment

and humiliation in front of other prisoners was also practiced. All target groups except

jail staff claimed that these abusive practices occurred. Jail staff admitted physical

punishment only to those juveniles who engaged in negative activities like

disturbance, quarrelsome and rude behavior etc. with jail personnel. It is also worthy

of note that there was no attempt to rehabilitate these ―problematic‖ inmates.

Inconsonant Views of Juveniles, Probation Officers and Legal Counsels with Jail

Staff

Table No. 4.3.2 is about attitude of the jail staff towards juvenile prisoners.

Asked about the statement that jail staff fairly deals juvenile prisoners, the

194
quantitative and qualitative data supported and confirmed that the attitude of the jail

staff was not good in regard to juvenile inmates. The juvenile prisoners in quantitative

data and legal counsels, probation officers and juvenile inmates in the qualitative data

of the study supported each other and confirmed that jail staff did deal fairly with

juvenile inmates, whereas jail staff believed that they fairly dealt with juvenile

prisoners. According to The United Nations (1986), the function of NGOs in

minimizing the consequences of juvenile delinquency is acknowledged by the United

Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (The

Beijing Rules) as ―Serious attention shall be given to positive measures that involve

the full utilization of all possible resources, including the family, volunteers and other

community groups, as well as schools and other community institutions, for the

purpose of promoting the welfare of the juvenile, with a view to reducing the need for

intervention under the law, and of effectively, fairly and humanely dealing with the

juvenile in conflict with the law‖. According to the United Nations positive measures

should be in place to ensure the welfare of juveniles and jail staff should fairly deal

with the juvenile inmates at jails. Aside from the views of the jail staff, the result of

the remaining stakeholders confirmed that the attitude of jail staff was not in line with

the Beijing Rules.

Asked about the availability of rehabilitative and correctional facilities, most

of the stakeholders confirmed that there were no rehabilitative measures, whereas jail

staff negated their views. Most of the juvenile prisoners reported that jail staff beat

them and punished them with rods. The qualitative data confirmed the results of the

quantitative data in that there were no correctional and rehabilitative facilities in the

sampled jails. Jail staff negated the objection of other stakeholders by maintaining

that they treat juvenile inmates with kindness like their own children. According to

195
Moon and Maxwell (2004), South Korea worked to change the punishment approach

to a rehabilitative approach. Importance was given to treatment programs. Special

focus given to education and counseling of juvenile prisoners, where the role of jail

staff changed from custodial punishment to more of a human services role by training

the officers inthe jails to treat the juvenile prisoners exclusively. The findings of

Farkas (1995) and Paboojian and Teske (1997) referred to the trend that most jails in

America, Asia and in Europe changed their jail policy by offering rehabilitation,

correction and counseling where the punishment approach was applied previously. It

is concluded from the discussion that most of the countries changed their policy of

punishment to rehabilitation of juveniles with a focus on education of the juvenile

prisoners. The findings of the study showed that there were no rehabilitative

orcorrectional facilities available to juvenile inmates at the sampled jails of Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa.

Furthermore, asked about the prevalence of cruel, humiliating practices with

juvenile inmates, both qualitative and quantitative results confirmed the existence of

cruel, humiliating practices carried out on juvenile inmates. All stakeholders except

jail staff in qualitative data reported that juvenile inmates faced harsh behavior and

abusive language from jail staff. Jail staff rejected the above findings and said that

they did not treat juvenile inmates negatively they took good care of them. The

findings of the United Nations (1984) supported the results of both quantitative and

qualitative data. According to the United Nation Convention Against Cruel or

Humiliating Treatment (UNCAT) signatories are required to make sure that there will

be no cruel, humiliating practices carried out at jails for all kinds of prisoners,

especially for juveniles. It is concluded from the study findings of both qualitative and

quantitative data that jail staff treated juvenile inmates very harshly and beat them.

This is a violation of the above-mentioned convention.

196
 Similarities were found from the results of quantitative and qualitative data

about the statement that penalty or punishment at the jail has negative effects on

juvenile prisoners. Quantitative data showed that harsh and negative attitudes of the

jail staff had negative consequences upon the juvenile prisoners. In the qualitative

data most of the respondents said that juvenile inmates faced cruel and humiliating

practices, which could have adverse effects on their personality development. They

further added that due to the application of a punitive approach, upon their release

from jail juveniles may engage in severe crimes and join gangs of adult criminals.

Only jail staff in the qualitative portion of the study did not confirm the above results,

instead, they argued that imprisonment serves as a correctional strategy itself. The

believed that juveniles would tend to avoid future involvement in criminal activities

because of the fear of the penalties associated with their negative activities. According

to Gendreau, Little and Goggin (1996), in 1970 many researchers found that the

penalty approach has negative effects on juveniles, for example, the recidivism rate

has increased in those jails where the punishment of juveniles exists. Furthermore, the

findings of the HRCP (2014) also supported the results. According to the penal code

of Pakistan, there should be no punishment and torture at jails. It is concluded from

the findings that jail staff have been using the old ways to treat the inmates through

penalties and harsh attitudes at Pakistani jails, whereas the effects of such treatment

are associated with negative personality development of juvenile inmates.

Furthermore, the majority of the juvenile prisoners said that negative and

harsh attitudes of the jail staff promoted criminal tendencies in juvenile inmates. All

agents of the qualitative data except jail staff verified and confirmed the quantitative

results and reported that jail staff promotes criminal tendencies at jail through their

unhealthy and negative behavior with juveniles. According to the International Crisis

Group (ICG) (2011), breaking of rules and laws of the jail system is due to the corrupt

197
officers in jails. Jail staff is appointed due to nepotism or other means instead of

merit; this is why they treat juveniles in negative ways. Due to this, jails become a

breeding place for the promotion of criminal activities and the juvenile prisoners tend

to return to crimes instead of rehabilitation and become recidivists. It is concluded

from the findings that unhealthy behavior of jail staff results in the promotion of

criminal tendencies. Abusive treatment at the hands of jail staff only not affects the

welfare of juveniles, but the whole of society as these juveniles are then more likely to

become involved in criminal activities after their release from jail.

When asked about the prevalence of corrupt practices of jail staff, juvenile

prisoners reported that jail staff demands bribes in one shape or another as a

compensation for favors. When juveniles‘ parents, relatives and lawyers visited them,

jail staff did not give permission for meeting, because they were looking for a bribe.

All stakeholders who provided qualitative data except jail staff supported the above

findings, where jail staff declared it as an unfair allegation against them. According to

Akbar and Bhutta (2012), the jail staff often took bribes from the juvenile prisoners

when they needed something. When juveniles met with their parents, relatives and

legal counsel, jail staff wants more money or any other thing from them. It is

concluded from the findings of the study that jail staff took bribes from the juvenile

prisoners; this has negative impacts on the lives of juvenile inmates.

Moreover, when asked about the access of juvenile inmates to legal counsel,

probation officers and their parents, the majority of the juvenile respondents were of

the view that jail staff did not allow juvenile inmates to meet them. It was confirmed

by juveniles that they faced difficulties in accessing legal counsel, probation officers

and their parents. The above findings were confirmed by all stakeholders of the justice

system except jail staff in qualitative data. They further added that their cases and

trials were delayed. For minor offenses, they spent months and years at jails without

198
facing judges in the courts. These delays overburden jails and contribute to prison

overcrowding. Jail staff objected over the above findings and said that juveniles have

access to their lawyers, parents and probation officers without any interruption.

According to Akbar and Bhutta (2012), jail staff did not give permission to juvenile

prisoners to meet their parents or other relatives; they wanted bribes from juveniles or

they demand to meet with them at night time. It is concluded from the above results

that juvenile prisoners were facing difficulties attempting to access to legal counsels,

probation officers and parents, which resulted in delays of their trials.

Furthermore, when asked about ethics and manners, the majority of the

juvenile respondents said that jail staff does not teach any type of ethics or manners to

them at jail. In qualitative data most of the parricipants from all stakeholders except

jail staff confirmed the views of juveniles and added that only religious teacher

instructs them about ethics and manners at jail. Jail staff negated the above findings

and argued that the jail staff teaches juvenile inmates their formal education along

with religious education. According to the United Nations (1986), there shall be

positive measures for treating juveniles, education shall also be provided, jail staff is

required to teach ethical education and manners to them.

It is concluded from the findings and discussion of the study that jail staff did

not deal fairly with juvenile inmates. These unfair dealings have negative

consequences. Every aspect of the attitude of jail staff was reported as negative by all

agents of justice system except for the jail staff. All of these aspects were found to be

significantly associated with the well-being of juveniles as it affects the multiple

aspects of their proper development and rehabilitation. The government needs to deal

with this menace at jails.

199
 4.3.3 Association between Exclusive Jails (Borstal Institution) and Well-being of
juveniles

Statement Well-being of Juveniles Total Statistics

Agree Disagree Don’t (%)
(%) (%) know (%)
Juveniles are beaten at jail
Agree 42(31.8) 53(40.2) 07(5.3) 102(77.3) (p=0.000)
Disagree 20(15.2) 08(6.1) 01(0.8) 29(22.0) (χ2=20.772)
Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles are fearful of Agree 60(45.5) 59(44.7) 06(4.5) 125(94.7) (p=0.000)
the jail staff Disagree 02(1.5) 02(1.5) 02(1.5) 06(4.5) (χ2=21.108)
Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles are prey to ill Agree 60(45.5) 58(43.9) 07(5.3) 125(94.7) (p=0.005)
manners of jail staff like Disagree 02(1.5) 03(2.3) 01(0.8) 06(4.5) (χ2=15.078)
shouting, and beating etc. Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Overcrowding at jail Agree 51(38.6) 43(32.6) 03(2.3) 97(73.5) (p=0.000)
increases disharmony Disagree 03(2.3) 09(6.8) 00 12(9.1) (χ2=20.403)
among juveniles Don‘t 00 09(6.8) 06(4.5) 23(17.4)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Recreational services are Agree 02(1.5) 06(4.5) 00 08(6.1) (p=0.000)
available to juveniles at Disagree 60(45.5) 54(40.9) 07(5.3) 121(91.7) (χ2=20.511)
jail Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Jail life disturbs the Agree 57(43.2) 56(42.4) 05(3.8) 118(89.4) (p=0.000)
smooth functioning of Disagree 04(3.0) 05(3.8) 02(1.5) 11(8.3) (χ2=20.851)
juvenile(s) lives Don‘t 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Medical care/treatment Agree 02(1.5) 08(6.1) 00 10(7.6) (p=0.001)
facilities are there at jail Disagree 60(45.5) 53(40.2) 08(6.1) 121(91.7) (χ2=18.704)
Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Skill development Agree 00 00 02(1.5) 02(1.5) (p=0.000)
programs are there for Disagree 60(45.5) 56(42.4) 07(5.3) 123(93.2) (χ2=29.606)
juveniles Don‘t 02(1.5) 05(3.8) 00 07(5.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles sleep and live a Agree 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3) (p=0.000)
relaxed life at jail Disagree 61(46.2) 60(45.5) 06(4.5) 127(96.2) (χ2=24.551)
Don‘t 01(0.8) 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The figure in the table denotes frequency while figure in parenthesis denotes percentage. The symbol (P)
represents the significance level and (χ2) represents the value of chi square.

200
 Table No. 4.3.3 is about the Exclusive Jailss (Borstal Institutions) statement,

which asked whether juvenile inmates were beaten at jail. The association with the

well-being of juveniles was found highly significant (p=0.000). It is concluded that

due to harsh behavior and beating of juvenile inmates by jail staff, most of the inmates

become deviant and after release from jails they become involved in negative

activities and join gangs.

The juvenile prisoners were fearful ofthe jail staff; there was a highly

significant association (p=0.000) revealed with the well-being of juveniles. The result

showed that due to beating and rude behavior by the jail staff most of the juveniles

were depressed and facing psychological problems.

A statement asked the juvenile inmates whether they were prey to the ill

manners of the jail staff. A significant (p=0.005) association was observed with the

well-being of juveniles. It showed that juvenile prisoners faced the ill and negative

manners and also abusive and vulgar language of jail staff. Furthermore,

overcrowding in jail produces many problems where a highly significant (p=0.000)

association was related to overcrowding in a jail increasing disharmony among

juveniles. It showed that due to overcrowding hazardous situation resulted at jails.

There were no recreational facilities for juveniles like cricket, football,

volleyball etc. in the sampled jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa where a highly significant

(p=0.000) association was found.

A statement asked whether jail life disturbs the smooth functioning of

juveniles‘ life where a highly significant (p=0.000) association was observed with the

well-being of juveniles. It is concluded from the findings that juvenile prisoners have

the right to access all the basic facilities at jails, but there were no facilities provided

201
to them. There was no education, physical health and recreation facilities in sampled

jails, which disturbed the smooth functioning of juveniles‘ lives.

There were no basic medical facilities provided to juvenile inmates even

ambulances were not provided in case of any emergency where a significant

(p=0.001) association was observed with the well-being of juveniles.

A highly significant (p=0.000) association was found with the absence of

developmental programs for juveniles at jail. It was clear from the result that there

were no such facilities provided to them. Furthermore, juveniles were not able to

sleep or relax at jail where a highly significant (p=0.000) association was explicated

with the well-being of juveniles. Data showed that due to poor living conditions and

overcrowding, and a lack of separate beds, mattresses and pillows they do not sleep

well.

It is concluded from the whole findings of the table that juvenile prisoners did

not feel secure at jails and also the attitude of jail staff was negative. The rude

behavior and punishment strategy of the jail staff increases criminal tendencies in

juveniles. Jail staff beat and treated juveniles like animals; they used vulgar and

abusive language to juveniles, also there were no recreational and other basic facilities

provided at jails.

Juvenile Jails (Borstal Institutions) Theme

Data from Juvenile Inmates

Modern states introduced borstal institutions for the purpose of providing

exclusive environments for juvenile offenders. The exclusive environment is to

provide maximum opportunities for juveniles‘ good personality, and to provide them

202
with a sound environment for education and skills development and appropriate

environment for reformation in order to make them productive citizens when they

complete their incarceration period and are released. On the other hand, if there is no

borstal institution available for juveniles, they are sent to adult jails where they spend

their incarceration along with adult prisoners. There should be separate cells for

juvenile prisoners where jail staff should have control over juveniles‘ interactions

with adult prisoners; however, the majority of the juvenile interviewees said that at

jails no facilities were provided to them. They also said that the jail staff beats them

when they commit any wrong doing; they shout at juvenile prisoners and use vulgar

language. Juvenile prisoners were fearful of jail staff and were living in frustration

due to their harmful attitudes and actions. Some of the juveniles said that they did not

sleep well at nights because there were no separate beds and foams/mattresses for

them. Due to overcrowding, some of them lived in toilets and spent whole night

standing because there was no place for sleeping. Those who slept in Munda Khana

became attached to each other. The researcher asked about the facilities and said them

about the borstal institution and JJSO 2000; most of the juvenile inmates said that at

jail no basic facilities were provided to them. They answered that NGOs provided the

recreational facilities, but the jail staff took those goods and things from them.

Furthermore, they replied that jail staff does not treat them well and did not provide

the basic rights which are in JJSO, 2000.

One of the participants from juveniles, Atif, said;

―I was very happy before imprisonment; jail environment finished my

whole life jail disturb the smooth functioning of my life. Police arrest

me with hashish and the judge sent me to jail‖.

203
 Jail life was so bad and dangerous for the personality development of juvenile

inmates, most of them were sent to jail for the first time. Atif was of the view that

before imprisonment, he was very happy and lived his life smoothly and did not know

about the high level of crimes. He further added that he met with dangerous criminals

in jail and learned more severe kinds of crimes from them. In JJSO, 2000 it is clear

that juvenile prisoners should not be kept at jails, they should be in borstal

institutions. More than seventeen years following the introduction of JJSO, no serious

and practical steps have been taken by the government to apply the JJSO, 2000 in a

practical manner for the betterment of juvenile inmates. In borstal institutions every

type of accommodation should be available for juveniles like health, education and

other basic facilities and also teachers for counseling, but unfortunately in the whole

province there is no functional borstal institution for juvenile inmates.

Data from Legal Counsels

The majority of legal counsels said that borstal institutions exist all over the

world. In Pakistan in the Musharraf era, it was announced that there should be borstal

institutions in every district of the country according to the JJSO, 2000. They further

added that borstal institutions are for the reformation, rehabilitation, and education of

the juvenile prisoners. Juvenile inmates in the borstal institutions are not treated like

adult prisoners, instead, they are dealt like normal members of the society. In the last

17 years in Pakistan only three borstal institutions have been built. These are located

in Karachi, Bahawalpur, and Faisalabad. In KP there is only one borstal institution,

which is under construction and is not functional. Borstal institutions help reduce

social trauma related with being a prisoner in an adult jail. Some of the respondents

were of the view that in a borstal institution they could also work on skills

development so that they could become effective members of society when they are

204
released from the Institution. The borstal institution can be considered as an alternate

to the normal educational institution. Juveniles are provided with proper, formal,

informal and madrassa education inside the borstal institution.

One of the participants from the legal counsels Aftab Khan said that;

―There is not even a single functional borstal institution in the whole

KP Province, due to non-availability of borstal institution juvenile

inmates are kept in jails along with adult prisoners, which may cause

lots of problems, they indulge and learn negative activities like drug

use and also adult prisoners exploit juvenile prisoners sexually‖.

The presence of borstal institutions is of great importance everywhere. In the

absence of borstal institutions in places like KP, juveniles are treated in a way that

goes against the values of basic human rights. They are kept in an unhealthy

environment with adult prisoners. In the presence of adult prisoners, juvenile inmates

are exploited sexually which could be avoided if the borstal institutions were present.

Adult prisoners have easy access to drugs therefore juvenile prisoners were also in

some cases getting addicted to drugs due to frequent interaction with adult prisoners.

Due to the absence of borstal institutions the juveniles were kept in crowded cells

close to each other, which results in reduced living conditions negatively affecting the

overall health of the juvenile prisoners.

Data from Probation Officers

Probation officers were of the view that a borstal institution should be a place

where the juvenile inmates are sent instead of jail. The majority of the interviewees

said that the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance introduced in 2000 was meant to

protect juveniles who commit any crime or engage in negative activity which is

205
forbidden by the law. They further added that in JJSO, 2000 there is a provision

mandating the availability of borstal institution for juveniles who are involved in any

unlawful activity. Some of the probation officers said that in borstal institutions, all

the basic facilities were provided to juveniles. They further added that the best way to

socialize and guide juvenile prisoners was to release them on probation and the

alternate was the borstal institution where they had access to a proper schooling

system, health facilities, recreational facilities, religious education, skill development

programs, rehabilitation and counseling were provided to juveniles.

Few of the participants from the group of probation officers reported;

―JJSO, 2000 is not practically applied in Pakistan due to the absence of

functional borstal institution in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Juvenile inmates

are sent to jails where their rehabilitation is not possible and they

become part of the criminals at jail‖.

Probation officers were of the opinion that the Juvenile Justice System

Ordinance, 2000 was not applied practically; this was due to a failure of the

government to apply the JJSO. Juvenile inmates sent to jail because of non-

availability of functional borstal institutions in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. There was only

one borstal institution in the province in district Bannu but that was also not

functional. Juvenile inmates are sent to jail for rehabilitation and reformation, but in

Pakistani jails there are no rehabilitative measures for juvenile inmates. Juvenile

inmates become further involved in negative activities in the jails they become

habitual drug users and make relations with adult prisoners. Probation officers further

added that juvenile inmates were fearful of jail staff who beat juveniles and used

vulgar languages to juvenile inmates. Jail staff did not provide the recreational

facilities and development programs mentioned in JJSO, 2000 which called for basic

206
facilities to be provided to juvenile prisoners, whereas, in borstal institutions,

education, skill development programs, recreational facilities, shall be provided to

juvenile inmates. They further added that in borstal institutions the socialization,

counseling, rehabilitation and reformation of the juvenile inmates were quite better

than that of adult jails.

Data from Jail Staff

There was no borstal institution for juvenile prisoners; a borstal institution is a

place where juvenile inmates are kept when they are involved in any unlawful

activity. According to Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000, there should be

minimum one borstal institution in every district of the province, but still after the

introduction of JJSO 2000, in the last 17 years there has been only one borstal

institution in Bannu in the whole province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, but that was not

functional. According to JJSO 2000, juveniles should be sent to borstal institutions

rather than jail. Borstal institutions must be included with separate beds, toilet

facilities, recreational facilities, hospitals, a psychiatrist, proper medical treatment and

the environment will be highly hygienic. The majority of the jail staff were of the

opinion that they provided all the existing facilities to juvenile inmates in the jail but

not like in a borstal institution. They were of the view that despite the lack of borstal

institutions they were trying to provide basic facilities at jail. They further added that

they wrote many applications to the magistrate to complain that they were stricken by

overcrowding, juvenile inmates were also disturbed psychologically and there was a

need for separate jail or to release juvenile prisoners on probation, but their responses

were not appreciated. There were no borstal institutions for juvenile inmates, due to

this they were put in the same jail with adult criminals. Some of the jail staff said that

there were no facilities of the academic education for juvenile inmates at the jail, they

were trying their best to teach some of juvenile prisoners who were already enrolled

207
in schools before they were arrested. They also added that at jail, health facilities were

provided to them but acknowledged that they were not up to the standard as they had

a limited financial budget for health facilities.

Discussion Juvenile Jails (Borstal Institutions) for Juvenile Prisoners

The relative environment and service at sampled jails of KP is evaluated and

discussed in this section with reference to borstal institution under the variable of no

exclusive jails or borstal institutions for juvenile inmates. From the provisions of

JJSO 2000, it is clear that there should be borstal institutions in every district but there

is no single functional institution in the whole province. Juvenile inmates were living

along with adult prisoners at jail where they were not provided the recreation, proper

education and health services mandated by JJSO 2000; this has disturbed the smooth

functioning of their lives. The non-availability of such services which are provided at

borstal institutions to juvenile inmates is discussed in detail with the consonant and

inconsonant views of the stakeholders of the justice system.

Consonant views of Juveniles with Agents of Justice System

Table No. 4.3.3 is about the relative facilities and services at jail with

reference to borstal institutions. Juvenile inmates were asked whether overcrowding

increased disharmony at their jail. Most of the juvenile respondents replied that

overcrowding was one of the major problems that were faced by the juvenile inmates

at jail. The finding was also supported and confirmed by the qualitative data from all

stakeholders, they said that there were no proper place for juveniles‘ sleeping due to

unavailability of space. At one jail, 50-60 juvenile inmates were sleeping in a single

barrack. The overcrowding of inmates resulted in many issues which include the

frequent sexual activities among juveniles, unhealthy living environment, physical

208
injuries, psychological problems and many other issues. According to Wordes and

Jones (1998), overcrowding at jail has been found to be related with increased

altercations between jail staff and juvenile inmates and increased injuries to juveniles.

It is concluded from the findings of the statement that overcrowding at jail has

increased disharmony because of the multiple problems that are associated with

overcrowding.

Furthermore, when asked about the disturbance of the smooth functioning of

juveniles‘ lives at jail, most of the juvenile respondents in the quantitative portion of

the study and all stakeholders in qualitative data supported and confirmed each other‘s

results and said that jail life disturbed the smooth functioning of juveniles‘ lives. They

added that jail life ended their freedom and their happiness because at jail there were

no facilities provided to them. They reported that every prisoner is considered a

criminal at jail. They had started a new life at jail, which was very different from their

own previous life at home. Juvenile inmates further added that without their family,

relatives and friends, jail life resulted in the disturbance of their normal life. Probation

officers further added that jail is not an appropriate place for juvenile inmates. The

better solution is to release them on probation, but the magistrates were not ready to

release them on probation. The study findings of Smith (1998) supported both the

results of the study; according to Smith, jail life can be quite destructive to juveniles‘

lives. Jail separates them from their friends, families and also it disturbs their

schooling. According to him some jails provided different types of facilities to

juveniles for recreation, which differ from jail to jail. He further added that jail life

disturbs the personality of juvenile inmates because they interact with adult criminals

and learn new techniques of crimes. It is concluded from the findings that juvenile

inmates have the right to the provisions of all basic facilities at jail, but because there

209
were no basic facilities provided to them in the sampled jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa,

the smooth functioning of juveniles‘ lives was disturbed.

Answering to a statement about the provision of skills development programs

for juveniles at jail, all agents of the justice system confirmed that there were no such

development programs for juveniles at jail. Both quantitative and qualitative data

confirmed that there were no skill development programs. According to UNICEF

(2006), at jails there should be structured programs where skills of inmates shall be

developed. Juveniles shall be supported in finding jobs for themselves after releasing

from jails. It is concluded from the findings and discussion that the absence of skill

development programs at the sample jails of KP has negative effects on the well-

being of juveniles.

Inconsonant Views of Juveniles, Probation Officers and Legal Counsels with Jail
Staff

Asked about beating of juveniles by the jail staff at sampled jails, juveniles in

quantitative data reported that jail staff did not treat them well. The result of the

quantitative statement was supported and confirmed by all stakeholders except jail

staff in qualitative data. Juvenile prisoners said that jail staff beat them with sticks and

feet and probation officers and legal counsels confirmed and supported the above

statement of juveniles. Only jail staff did not support the above views of all the

stakeholders of justice system. They maintained that they did not beat juvenile

inmates. They consider these juveniles as their own children. According to Gendreau,

Little and Goggin (1996), the punitive approach in the jails has negative effects on

juvenile prisoners. Kazmi et al. (2013) mentioned in their study that the wardens and

other jail staff were not well trained to treat juvenile prisoners in a positive manner or

inan appropriate way. Juveniles are tender prey for the ill manners of jail staff, which

210
has negative impact over their rehabilitation. Such behavior of jail staff leads to

encouragement of criminal tendencies among juveniles. It is concluded from the

above discussion that juveniles become deviant and engage in criminal activities and

join gangs after their release from jail because of the ill manners of jail staff.

Furthermore, when asked about the psychological/mental condition of juvenile

prisoners, they said that they were fearful ofthe jail staff. It was confirmed by all the

agents of justice system in qualitative data that juveniles were fearful of the jail staff

because of their ill treatment. Legal counsels and probation officers said that when

they visited with their clients at jail, juvenile inmates were afraid because jail staff

beat them very harshly. Jail staff did not support the results and said that juvenile

inmates are like their own children, they just blame them. Previous literature also

supported both the quantitative and qualitative results of the study. According to the

United Nations (1984), juvenile inmates were treated very negatively at different jails

across the world where they have beaten for minor mistakes. Due to ill manners of the

jail authority juveniles feel insecure at jails and they are fearful of the jail staff.

Juvenile inmates were also facing tension, anxiety and frustration which was

associated with the behavior of jail authorities. It is concluded from the above

discussion that the prevalence of beating and harsh behavior of jail staff affects

multiple aspects of juveniles‘ well-being.

Moreover, juvenile prisoners supported the statement that they were beaten by

the jail staff. In qualitative data all the agents of justice system except jail staff

supported the above findings. Both the quantitative and qualitative data supported and

confirmed each other‘s results. Juvenile prisoners in quantitative and probation

officers, legal counsels and juvenile prisoners in qualitative data said that jail staff had

negative manners and attitude with juvenile inmates; they shouted and beat them.

Probation officers and legal counsel further added that jail is not an appropriate place

211
for juvenile inmates because the rehabilitation of juvenile inmates is not possible at

jail. Jail staff treated young inmates like the adult criminals who also lived at the same

jail. When jail staff were interviewed they said that they neither beat nor did they use

abusive language to juvenile inmates. According to the United Nations (1984) and

Kazmi et al. (2013), jail staff did not deal juveniles fairly across the world. Due to

negative manners of jail staff, juveniles feel insecure and frightened. Jail staff also

uses iron rods for beating juveniles at jail. It is concluded from the above discussion

that due to the ill manners of jail staff, the rehabilitation and re-integration of juvenile

inmates at jail is affected.

Asked about the availability of recreational services at jail, juvenile inmates

said that NGOs provided sports goods but the jail staff took those goods from them

and did not provide them. The findings of quantitative data were confirmed and

supported through qualitative data by all stakeholders except jail staff. Legal counsels

and probation officers argued that not providing recreational facilities to juveniles is

the violation of JJSO 2000. On the other hand, jail staff in qualitative data reported

that in each barrack of jail, there is television for the entertainment of juvenile

inmates. They further added that due to the lack of a playground at jail they could not

provide out door recreational facilities to them. According to the findings of Smith

(1998), jail life separates juvenile prisoners from their families and friends and

disturbs their proper socialization; jail life also disturbs their schooling. According to

Smith, across the world many types of services are provided to juvenile inmates at

borstal institutions such services include education, physical and mental health and

especially recreational facilities. These kinds of institutions provide more recreational

facilities for juveniles because it keeps them away from different mental issues and

criminal tendencies. Moreover, recreational facilities also help in the proper

212
development and rehabilitation of juvenile inmates, so that they may become

productive citizens when they are released from jail.

Asked about the availability of medical facilities for juvenile inmates, juvenile

prisoners said that there were no such facilities provided to them in jail. Jail staff

gives one tablet for every kind of illness or disease. They further added that jail staff

did not shift them to the hospital, even if they fell severely ill. All agents of the justice

system except jail staff supported the above finding through qualitative data, where

jail staff said that they provided the entire medical facilities to them. Jail staff further

added that there was a hospital in the jail in which they had a medical specialist doctor

who provided medical treatment to juveniles. According to the International Crises

Group (2011), due to lack of funding and other governmental aid, prisoners face

severe problems of health due to lack of medical facilities at jail. The living

environment for prisoners is terrible, irrespective of sufficient funding to jail; there

wasan absence of health care services and adequate medical facilities. HIV/AIDS and

other infectious diseases were also reported in some prisoners.

Furthermore, juvenile inmates reported that they haven't slept well at jail.

They were of the view that due to overcrowding, they had no place for sleeping

neither did they have sleeping mattresses at jail. The above views of juveniles were

supported through qualitative data by all agents of justice system except jail staff, who

were of the view that they had provided all the available resources to juvenile

prisoners. The findings of the Rodriguez (2007) and U.S Department of State (2013)

supported the results of the study. According to their studies, many problems

prevailed due to living conditions at different jails across the globe. It is concluded

from the above discussion that juvenile prisoners had neither slept nor they had lived

a relaxed life at jail due to incongruous jail environment.

213
 4.3.4 Association between Delayed Justice and Well-being of juveniles

Well-being of Juveniles
Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Total Statistics
(%) (%) know (%) (%)
Juveniles have the Agree 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 02(1.5) (p=0.028)
knowledge about the Disagree 40(30.3) 34(25.8) 02(1.5) 76(57.6) (χ2=10.873)
rights and privileges Don‘t 22(16.7) 26(19.7) 06(4.5) 54(40.9)
provided under the JJSO, Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
2000
Juveniles are happy with Agree 27(20.5) 08(6.1) 00 35(26.5) (p=0.000)
the behavior of jail police Disagree 35(26.5) 52(39.4) 08(6.1) 95(72.0) (χ2=23.643)
at the time of conviction Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Parents/guardian has the Agree 59(44.7) 60(45.5) 07(5.3) 126(95.5) (p=0.010)
provision to hire a lawyer Disagree 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5) (χ2=13.291)
for litigation of their Don‘t 00 00 02(1.5) 04(3.0)
children/wards Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Government provided free Agree 01(0.8) 00 00 01(0.8) (p=0.035)
legal counseling to Disagree 59(44.7) 60(45.5) 07(5.3) 126(95.5) (χ2=10.348)
juveniles Don‘t 02(1.5) 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 05(3.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Delaying in justice Agree 50(37.9) 36(27.3) 02(1.5) 88(66.7) (p=0.000)
process has adverse Disagree 06(4.5) 11(8.3) 01(0.8) 18(13.6) (χ2=20.207)
effects on juveniles
Don‘t 06(4.5) 14(10.6) 06(4.5) 26(19.7)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The jail staff or police Agree 56(42.4) 57(43.2) 05(3.8) 118(89.4) (p=0.000)
demand for something in Disagree 05(3.8) 04(3.0) 02(1.5) 11(8.3) (χ2=20.855)
return to access to judge Don‘t 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The figure in the table denotes frequency while figure in parenthesis denotes percentage. The
symbol (P) represents the significance level and (χ2) represents the value of chi square.

Table No. 4.3.4 is about delayed justice; it was observed that juvenile inmates

didn't know anything about their rights and privileges mentioned in JJSO 2000 where

a significant (p=0.028) association was found with the well-being of juveniles. It is

concluded that after the introduction of JJSO 2000, no provision of JJSO was adopted

for the welfare of juveniles.

214
 Moreover, it was observed that the behavior and attitude of the jail police was

not good and positive with juveniles at the time of their conviction where the

statement supported with a highly significant association (p=0.000) with the well-

being of juvenile inmates. The findings showed that they were not happy with the

behavior of jail police. From the significant result of the statement, it is concluded that

the police were punishing them at the time of their conviction and also, they put

handcuffs on juveniles which was against the JJSO, 2000.

In addition, it was observed that parents/guardian had the provision to hire a

lawyer for litigation of their children/wards where a significant association (p=0.010)

found with the well-being of juveniles. It is concluded from the findings that parents

or guardian support their children in legal assistance, they had the provision to hire a

lawyer for litigation of their children. The government did not support them in the

litigation of their children‘s cases, where the provision of free legal assistance exists

in JJSO, 2000.

A statement asked the juvenile inmates to consider whether government

provided free legal counseling to them where a significant association (p=0.035) was

observed with the well- being of juveniles. The findings showed that there was no

government assistance or legal counseling provided to them. It is concluded from the

findings of the statement that there wasno free legal assistance for juveniles whose

cases were under trial in the courts.

Similarly, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was observed with delays

in justice process—these delays had adverse effects on juveniles with the well-being

of juveniles. It is concluded from the findings of the statement that due to delays in

justice, juvenile inmates were facing many problems. According to them, their

215
families spent a degrading life due to this delaying justice, because financial support

of a private lawyer and wasting time at courts causes financial and psychological

problems to family members.

Moreover, it was found from the statement that jail staff or jail police demand

bribes from minor inmates in return for access to judges where a highly significant

association (p=0.000) was established with the well-being of juveniles. The

significant association showed that jail staff demands something from juveniles in

return of their access to judges and lawyers. When juveniles need something, jail staff

demand bribes to allow them to meet with lawyers and parents. It is concluded from

the overall findings and discussion of the table that after the introduction of JJSO

2000, juvenile inmates are not given provisions mentioned inthe ordinance including:

free legal assistance, and establishment of exclusive courts and borstal institutions at

every district of the country. There is no practicality of JJSO, 2000 in Pakistan, it is

just related to papers till to this time there is no exclusive court for juveniles in whole

country. In the JJSO 2000, it is stated that there should be free legal assistance for

juveniles, but this is also just in document form, parents or guardian support their

children through private lawyers, also the jail staff demands bribes from juveniles in

order to gain access to the judge.

Delayed Justice (Theme)

Data from Juvenile Prisoners

Unreasonable and undesirable prolonging of cases can be regarded as delayed

justice. In many countries where court procedures are slow, it affects those whose

cases are pending at court. Generally, cases of both civil and criminal nature are

delayed, but criminal cases need more attention because delays affect parties to the

cases more as compared to civil cases. About one third of prisoners in Pakistan are

216
under trial prisoners, which has made the famous maxim ―justice delayed is justice

denied‖ very true. The majority of the interviewees were of the estimation that most

cases of juvenile prisoners were delayed; they faced many problems in delaying

justice. Jail staff did not allow the parents and lawyers of the juvenile prisoners to

meet them and tell them the date on which they face the judge. Jail staff takes bribes

from juvenile prisoners to allow them to meet with their parents and lawyers. They

demanded sexual intercourse with the juveniles. The investigation officer of the case

was also not interested to complete the investigation on proper time. When the

investigation is not completed, then judges do not disclose their judgment without a

complete investigation of the case. Most of the juvenile inmates did not know about

the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) 2000, the researcher told them about

the privileges provided to juvenile prisoners under JJSO, 2000. They replied that there

was no free legal assistance, exclusive courts and borstal institutions in which all

types of facilities were provided to juvenile inmates. Some of the juvenile inmates

said that in jail, police not treated them well they beat them with sticks and feet when

they bring them to court. They beat juvenile inmates and used abusive language and

share with each other that these are the minors they committed crimes and when they

become adults they will be more dangerous, beat them well. In the litigation process

the majority of the participants were of the view that there was no free legal assistance

for juvenile inmates, their parents and guardian hired lawyers for their cases. The

governmental and other non-governmental organizations did not support them in the

litigation process. Furthermore, few of the interviewees said that due to the harsh

behavior of the jail staff and long process of justice they wanted to commit suicide or

to become more severe criminals to finish all these people who tortured them.

217
One participant, Sajjad, said that;

―We miss our case dates as the jail staff and jail police are not

cooperative and do not help to get us to the court on time and we do

not know about the case dates‖.

Juvenile prisoners should be provided with the facilities to access to their trial

dates on time, but there were no such facilities in the jails for them. Some of the jails

do not even have their own vehicle to bring them to court on hearing dates. Due to the

absence of these facilities and unfair behavior of jail staff, juvenile prisoners often

miss their trial dates which increase their case duration and juvenile prisoners under

trial find themselves incarcerated for a long time without any result.

Data from Legal Counsels

Delayed justice is the pending of decision, i.e. the decision that does not occur

within a reasonable amount of time. Delayed justice is also considered to be the cause

of problems for the juvenile prisoners as well as their families. The majority of the

interviewees said that delayed justice produces anxiety, psychological disorder,

disappointment, agitation, sadness and antagonistic behavior in juvenile prisoners

along with their families. Financial problem is one of the most important problems to

the families of juvenile prisoners. Most of their families were poor and unable to hire

lawyers to deal the cases of their children. According to JSSO 2000, it is a primary

responsibility of government to provide expert lawyers in order to handle the cases of

juvenile prisoners in skillful manner. But to date government has failed to provide

lawyers for juvenile inmates and due to the absence of lawyers and legal experts their

cases remained postponed. Another cause of delayed justice is that the investigation

and interrogation process of police is lengthy and takes much time to submit their

218
final report to judge. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the investigation officer to

submit their report within fourteen days and when the report is not submitted within

the given time frame the concerned judge should give him/her further three days of

submitting the investigation report; or seventeen days total. After twenty-eight days

the concerned judge hears their cases. Most of the participants said that the salary of

police is not too much, and then the concerned investigator cannot take interest to

bring them from jail to court. One of the important causes of delayed justice was that

the majority of the police was on duty of local VIPs and they had no time to bring the

prisoners from jail to court. Hence the cases of juvenile inmates remain pending and

delay. Some of the interviewees were of the view that absence of lawyers and judges

also create obstacles in their cases. When the date of juvenile cases come, often one

lawyer is absent while in many situations the absence of judges also created problems

barring the way towards speedy justice. Delayed justice is also caused due to the

specific jurisdiction of courts. Every judge deals with juvenile cases on the basis of

the police station of a specific area and had no interest to deal with cases which were

not in the jurisdiction of the police station. Some of the participants said that it is

necessary to empower the judges to take bold decisions and deal with the cases fairly.

Most of the judges don‘t take bold decisions because of the pressure of influential

people of the society. One of the interviewee from the penal said that most of the

juvenile prisoners belonged to poor families and their parents were unable to hire

lawyers. Hence the cases of these juvenile inmates are pending and had a long wait

for the final decision.

219
One of the participant from the group of legal counsels, Ahmad, said that;

―The number of judges is very limited in courts compared to the cases.

The cases are increasing day by day, which need more judges to deal

juveniles‘ cases on proper time‖.

From the above statement, it is clear that the number of the judges were very

limited in the courts even for the dealing with general prisoner cases. Also, there were

no special courts and judges for the juvenile cases which were a huge burden for these

judges. Hence their concentration of the cases was less compared to the developed

countries. The ratio of juvenile cases is increasing day by day while the decision rate

of these cases is very low, which causes the delay in justice of juvenile prisoners.

Another interviewee from legal counsels, Nisar, said that;

―Due to lack of proper preparation for cases, the lawyers take time and

changed the date of cases. Due to these reasons, the cases of juvenile

prisoners are delayed. Most of their families are poor and unable to pay

the fee of the lawyers within time, which is also the main cause of

delaying in cases‖.

The proper preparation for the cases is necessary to judge the cases properly,

which helps to solve the cases within a given frame of time, but unfortunately, most

of the lawyers don‘t prepare the cases properly, which is the main cause of delayed

justice. The lawyers also take too many cases from clients for economic purposes.

Due to large number of cases they cannot properly prepare their cases and change the

dates of trials. Most of the families of juvenile prisoners were poor and unable to pay

the fee of the lawyers within time; due to this the lawyers intentionally delay the cases

by changing the dates regularly.

220
Data from Probation Officers

The problem of delayed justice is not new in Pakistan, civil cases normally

took 5 to 10 years to solve, whereas criminal cases also took more than 5 years. This

situation of delaying justice process is very bad in all courts of the country. The

majority of the participants were of the opinion that some of the reasons behind delays

in the justice process in Pakistan were that the case load on prosecutors and judges

was increasing day by day and the accused often were not brought to court on time. In

Pakistan, there are more than 1.35 million cases pending. The number of juvenile

prisoners in the sampled jails were increasing and also, they were tried with the adult

criminals in the same court. The numbers of judges were also insufficient and

furthered the burden of juveniles and adult criminals on the courts. Some of the

probation officers further said that in JJSO, 2000 it is clear that there should be

exclusive courts for juvenile prisoners to deal with their cases but there were no

exclusive courts in Pakistan; even after the introduction of JJSO, 2000 in the last 17

years no such steps were taken to establish juvenile courts.

One of the interviewee from probation officers, Waqar, said that;

―Judiciary in Pakistan at the district level is itself a hurdle in the way of

speedy justice. It has three major problems like insufficient number of

judges in the districts, recruitment of inexperienced judges with no

specialization required over civil or criminal branch‖.

Probation officer Waqar said that in Pakistan the judiciary is also a problem

for speedy justice of the prisoners. He further added that judges were not sufficient in

numbers to deal with all the cases in due time, and also judges were not very

experienced or specialized. The lawyers were also not very experienced and expert in

dealing with the different cases such as civil and criminal. Waqar further added that

221
juvenile prisoners do not know about the privileges and rights provided to them in

JJSO, 2000; their parents hired lawyers for their litigation. While it is the duty of the

government to hire lawyers for juvenile prisoners for litigation under JJSO, 2000,

there was no support from the government side for them. Some of the interviewees

were of the view that jail staff takes bribes from prisoners in order to bring them to

the judge. They further added that some of the lawyers delay the trial of one party and

change the date, which was also one of the major points. Probation officers tried their

best to release juvenile inmates on probation but magistrates did not often release

them. Instead, they send juveniles to jail. There is no coordination between judiciary

and probation officers. Government also not provides proper funds to allow probation

officers to facilitate juvenile inmates on time.

Data from Jail Staff

Delays in justice are caused by many inconveniences in the system. The jail

staff is responsible for bringing under trial accused to the courts with the help of court

police on their trial dates. Similarly, juveniles under trial who were detained have the

right to be brought to the court by the jail staff and court police, whereas juvenile

inmates had mentioned that they were not brought to the court on their trial dates.

Some of juvenile prisoners had referred to the corrupt behavior of jail staff where they

said that jail staff demands money in return for the appearance of juvenile inmates to

the court on their trial dates. Also a few of them said that bringing prisoners to the

courts was the duty of the court police but the jail staff also helps them in this regard.

One of the jail staff Ishaq said that;

―We brought all the prisoners, including juveniles to the court on their
trial dates and their trials are not delayed from jail staff. However,
sometimes they are not presented to the court on their trial dates due to
some unforeseen events like the problem of peace, the unavailability of
transport and strikes etc.‖

222
 Jail staffer Ishaq was of the opinion that they brought all the prisoners to the

courts for their trials on their due dates. From the staff side, trials of juvenile prisoners

were not delayed; they brought them on time to the courts. Furthermore, he added that

jail staff faced problems like terrorism, unavailability of transport, financial problems,

protocol of the politician etc.

The majority of the jail staff were of the view that most of the juveniles‘

families were poor and not able to hire a lawyer for juveniles‘ litigation. They further

elaborated that often advocates were not present on the day of their litigation and thus

delayed the trial of juvenile inmates. Some of them stated that there were no juvenile

courts and their trials were heard in adult courts. They further added that there are

fewer adult courts and the prisoners are more numerous, therefore, the trials of

juvenile inmates become delayed. Moreover, participants said that one of the reasons

for the late trials of juvenile inmates was that there were fewer judges in adult courts

and the burden upon judges was too much, due to this the cases/trials of juveniles

were delayed.

Discussion on Delayed Justice

It is clear from the results of both quantitative and qualitative data of all

stakeholders that delays in the justice system of sampled juvenile inmates was

extremely serious. The juvenile inmates did not know about the rights and privileges

provided to them in JJSO 2000, they were not provided free legal counseling. Most of

the parents of juvenile inmates hired prosecutors for litigation of their children. Due to

lack of implementation of JJSO 2000, there is no single juvenile court in whole

country. Mostly juvenile cases were heard in adult courts that delayed the trials of

juvenile inmates. The delay in trials has adverse results and causes psychological and

223
financial problems for inmates and their families. Most of the juvenile inmates are

disturbed by the lengthy process of the courts. Jail staff were reported to take bribes

from juvenile inmates when they tried to access judges on their trial dates. Most of the

findings of the quantitative variable were confirmed and supported by all agencies of

justice system in qualitative data, where only one statement was not supported by jail

staff.

Consonant Views of Juveniles, Probation officers, Legal Counsels and Jail Staff

Table No. 4.3.4 is about delay in justice of juveniles‘ trials; their cases were

heard in the adult courts which resulted in the delaying of their trials. All agents of the

justice system confirmed and supported the findings of quantitative data, where

juvenile inmates said that they had no knowledge about the rights provided to them

under the law Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000. The findings of quantitative

data were supported and confirmed by all the stakeholders in qualitative data, they

said that there were no privileges given to juvenile inmates. There were no exclusive

courts due to which their cases were delayed. Previous literature supported the study;

according to International Crisis Group (ICG) (2011), rules of Juvenile Justice System

Ordinance (JJSO) 2000, has been violated as children were arrested illegally and

juveniles put in jail for minor offenses for months, where they were kept with

dangerous adult prisoners at the same jail. Juvenile inmates meet regularly with adult

criminals at jail and courts, which has strong effects on the well-being of juvenile

prisoners. It is concluded from the results that after the introduction of JJSO, 2000

there is no step taken to implement JJSO, 2000 including the provisions of exclusive

courts and borstal institutions for juvenile inmates.

224
 Moreover, when asked about the behavior of police at the time of conviction,

most of the juvenile respondents in quantitative data said that they were not happy

because police used vulgar language and beat them. Quantitative results were

supported by all agents of the justice system through qualitative data where they

added that police beat and bullied them after their conviction. Juvenile inmates in

qualitative data said that police beat juveniles with feet and sticks. All other agents of

justice system supported the view that police beat and bullied juvenile inmates at the

time of conviction. According to the findings of the UNICEF (2006), with reference

to Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) 2000, some steps have taken for juvenile

inmates who were involved in negative or unlawful activities and arrested by the

police. According to HRCP (2014), the Penal Code of Pakistan clarifies that there

should be no torture and punishment for juveniles at the time of conviction. From the

above discussion it is concluded that police were punishing the juveniles at the time of

conviction and also, they put handcuffs and fetters to them which is against the JJSO,

2000.

When responding to a statement that asked about the litigation process of the

juvenile prisoners, whether parents/guardian have the provision to hire a lawyer, most

of the juvenile respondents in the quantitative data said that their parents and other

members of the family supported them in the litigation process by hiring lawyers for

their trials. All the agents of the justice system supported the views of juveniles. Legal

counsels further added that the public prosecutor supports the prisoners when they

have no lawyer for their litigation process. Ramzan (2014) identified in his study that

Juvenile Justice System Ordinance (JJSO) 2000, exists on paper only, but in reality,

there is no implementation so far. Juvenile inmates were treated like adult criminals

even after the introduction of the ordinance. According to him it is the responsibility

of the state to provide free legal assistance to juveniles, where the findings of the

225
study showed that parents were providing legal assistance to their children. It is

concluded that parents or guardians support their children in providing legal

assistance irrespective of the states‘ provision to hire a lawyer for the litigation of

juveniles‘ cases.

Furthermore, asked about the government providing free legal counseling to

juvenile prisoners, the majority of the juveniles were of the view that there is no free

legal assistance from the government. The results of quantitative data were supported

and confirmed by all agents of justice system in qualitative data. They further added

that parents or other members of the family supported the juvenile inmates by hiring a

lawyer for their litigation. Legal counsels refers to a procedure for getting free public

legal aid that exists only in theory but no practical evidence is found. The defined

procedure states that if any juvenile could not fulfill the fee of a lawyer then the

government will support the juveniles by providing a lawyer. They further said that in

JJSO, 2000 it is clear that all juveniles should be supported by the government to hire

a lawyer for them, yet this provision has not been given to a single juvenile rod ate.

SPARC (2000) and Ramzan (2014) refer to the section 3 (1) of the Juvenile Justice

System Ordinance (JJSO) 2000, that government has the responsibility to provide free

legal assistance to juveniles, and also the government has to provide free legal

counseling and provide probation officers to juvenile inmates to take care of their

cases. According to Section 4 (1) of JJSO, 2000 federal and provincial governments

have to establish a juvenile court in each district, but after the introduction of JJSO,

2000 to this time there is no single court established for juvenile prisoners in the

whole country. It is concluded from the above discussion that there was no proper

juvenile system and no legal assistance provided by government to juvenile inmates.

When asked about the adverse effects of delays in the justice process on

juvenile inmates, the majority of juvenile respondents said that delays in the justice

226
system created psychological and economic problems for juvenile inmates, their

results were also confirmed by the findings of qualitative data. All agents of juvenile

justice system in qualitative data said that delaying in justice causes tension, anxiety

and frustration along with economic problems to juvenile inmates and their families.

Both of the results confirmed that delaying justice causes involvement of juvenile

inmates in negative activities. Due to delays in justice, most of the juvenile inmates

tend to join the gangs at jail. The National Institute of Justice (2014) confirmed and

supported the findings of the study. According to the National Institute of Justice,

delays in justice process have negative impacts not only on juveniles but their families

are affected as well. Psychological, financial and social impacts are some of those

impacts which they face due to delays in justice.

Inconsonant Views of Juveniles, Probation Officers and Legal Counsels with Jail
Staff
Juvenile inmates referred to the corrupt behavior of the jail staff. Juvenile

respondents were of the view that jail staff generally demanded something as a

compensation for their access to judge. The results of qualitative data supported and

confirmed the view of juveniles in quantitative data. In qualitative data all the

stakeholders except jail staff agreed with the above findings, where jail staff said that

juveniles had their own trial dates and this is the duty of the court police to bring them

to the court on proper time and date. According to the International Crisis Group

(2011), when a juvenile case begins, the guarding and transporting of juvenile

prisoners should be the responsibility of the police to bring them to court on trial

dates. One of the main reasons behind delays in justice is the corruption of the jail

staff or police as they demand bribes from juvenile prisoners on trial dates. It is

concluded from the whole findings and discussion that after the introduction of JJSO

(2000), there is no practical application so far, and numerous cases of juvenile

prisoners‘ delays.

227
 4.3.5 Association between Exclusive Courts and Well-being of Juveniles

Well-being of Juveniles
Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Total Statistics
(%) (%) know (%) (%)
Juvenile cases are tried at the Agree 59(44.7) 59(44.7) 06(4.5) 124(93.9) (p=0.000)
adult court Disagree 03(2.3) 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 05(3.8) (χ2=20.248)
Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles are treating as Agree 60(45.5) 60(45.5) 07(5.3) 127(96.2) (p=0.000)
adult criminals in courts Disagree 02(1.5) 01(0.8) 00 03(2.3) (χ2=28.243)
Don‘t 00 00 02(1.5) 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles cases in the courts Agree 60(45.5) 57(43.2) 05(3.8) 122(92.4) (p=0.000)
are heard publicly Disagree 01(0.8) 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) (χ2=20.949)
Don‘t 01(0.8) 04(3.0) 03(2.3) 08(6.1)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles cases are tried Agree 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8) (p=0.000)
satisfactory in adult courts Disagree 62(47.0) 60(45.5) 07(5.3) 129(97.7) (χ2=20.484)
Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 02(1.5)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles suffered Agree 54(40.9) 42(31.8) 03(2.3) 99(75.0) (p=0.000)
mentally from the lengthy Disagree 07(5.3) 12(9.1) 06(4.5) 25(18.9) (χ2=21.878)
and costly procedure of
the courts Don‘t 01(0.8) 07(5.3) 00 09(6.1)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Recidivism rate may Agree 37(28.) 46(34.8) 06(4.5) 89(67.4) (p=0.028)
increase with association Disagree 23(17.4) 12(9.1) 01(0.8) 36(27.3) (χ2=10.857)
of juveniles with adult Don‘t 02(1.5) 03(2.3) 02(1.5) 07(6.3)
criminals in courts Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The figure in the table denotes frequency while figure in parenthesis denotes percentage. The
symbol (P) represents the significance level and (χ2) represents the value of chi square.

Table No. 4.3.5 is about no exclusive courts for juvenile inmates. A statement

asked juvenile prisoners whether juveniles‘ cases were tried in the adult court where a

highly significant (p=0.000) association was found with the well-being of juveniles.

In JJSO, 2000 it is clear that there should be juvenile courts in every district of the

province and the cases should be tried in juvenile courts, but there is no single court

for juveniles in the whole country to date. Due to a lack of exclusive courts all the

juvenile cases were triedin the adult courts. Furthermore, juveniles were treated as

adult criminals in courts where a highly significant (p=0.000) association was

228
observed with the well-being of juveniles. It showed that juvenile inmates in the

sampled jails were treated as adults because there were no separate courts for them.

Moreover, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was found with

juveniles‘ cases at the court were heard publicly. It is concluded from the findings of

the statement that in the whole country, there is no single juvenile court, even after the

introduction of JJSO in 2000. Due to no exclusive court in Pakistan juvenile casesare

heard publicly in the adult courts.

A statement asked about the hearing of juvenile cases in adult courts, asked

whether juveniles cases were tried in a satisfactory manner where the statement was

supported with a highly significant association (p=0.000). The results showed that due

to the burden of cases on judges they did not give proper time to every case to handle

it in a proper way which causes dissatisfaction in juveniles.

Furthermore, juvenile prisoners suffered mentally from the lengthy and costly

procedure of the courts where a highly significant (p=0.000) association was found

with the well-being of juveniles. The findings showed that juveniles suffered from

lengthy procedure of the courts.

Furthermore, a statement asked whether the recidivism rate might increase

with the association of juveniles with adult criminals in the courts; this statement was

supported with a significant association (p=0.028) with the well-being of juveniles. It

is concluded from the finding of the statement that since juveniles‘ cases were heard

or tried at adult courts the recidivism rate increased in juveniles, because they were

exposed to other people and also, they met with adult criminals in courts.

It is concluded from the findings of the whole table that juveniles live a

hazardous life at jails; they become mentally disturbed from the lengthy and costly

procedure of the courts in Pakistan. There was no proper legal counsel for juveniles to

229
carry out their cases in courts, parents and guardians of juveniles helped their children

and pay fees of private lawyers to manage their children‘s cases in courts. The most

severe problem faced by the juveniles is that in whole country there is no single

juvenile court where judges can deal with their cases separate from adult criminals.

Exclusive Courts for Juveniles (Theme)

Data from Juvenile Prisoners

Litigation is a phenomenon where a person enters into the process of the court.

He/she may follow certain rules and regulations in order to maintain the sovereignty

of the court. A person may defend himself or by hiring an advocate. Juveniles are too

young and are not aware of the procedure of the courts. There must be an advocate

who can act as a facilitator to release him/her from the jail. This facilitator may be

hired by the juveniles‘ families, government or by an independent organization known

as an NGO. The majority of the juvenile participants were of the opinion that there

were no exclusive courts for juveniles in the whole province—their cases were held in

the adult courts. The same judge satand heard the cases of juveniles who heard all the

cases of women and adult prisoners. When juvenile cases are heard in adult courts,

judges deal with them like adult criminals. Some of interviewees were of the view

that on the day juveniles‘ cases are heard should be a day the judge does not deal with

cases of the adult prisoners, but juveniles continue to meet with the adult criminals in

the courts. Furthermore, juvenile prisoners said that they share their secrets with adult

prisoners in the courts, due to this the recidivism rate increased in them. When they

were released from jail, they engaged in more violent activities and were again

arrested by the police.

230
 Some of the participants said that when the trial dates of the juvenile prisoners

come, the jail staff does not inform them and create hurdles for them. Juveniles are

only allowed to contact the lawyers hired by their families if they give something to

jail staff in return for allowing the lawyers to visit the jail to meet their clients. While

in interaction with adult criminals, the attitude and behavior of juvenile inmates

changed and they tended to become involved in many serious offenses. As most of the

juvenile prisoners were coming from poor families, they could not afford the heavy

charges of hiring private lawyers. Therefore, their cases were prolonged, which led to

the lengthening of their incarceration while awaiting trial. Some of the interviewees

said that public heard their cases and the judgment of the judges which is against the

JJSO. In JJSO, 2000 it is clear that the cases of juvenile inmates should be heard in

separate rooms and no one should be allowed to hear their trials except their parents

and guardians. Participants further added that judges did not hear their cases

satisfactory; they sent juvenile inmates directly to jail.

One of the interviewee from juveniles‘ Shahid, said that;

―Our cases are dealt with in the adult courts. In the courts, there is very

limited time given to us and we are not given any chance to tell our

problems to the magistrate‖.

Juvenile inmates were of the opinion that the speed of court procedure in

juvenile cases was very slow. They were not satisfied with the procedure of the

courts; they said that there were no special judges for them also there was no free

legal assistance provided to them during the litigation process.

231
Data from Legal Counsels

Exclusive Courts are those courts which are only for the dealing of juvenile

cases. In the absence of juvenile courts, their cases are handled in adult courts, which

create problems for them. According to the JJSO 2000, there should be a juvenile

court in each district of the province, but unfortunately to date, no juvenile court is

present in the whole country. The majority of the participants said that juveniles‘

cases were tried in adult courts which may create problems for them. According to

them, it is necessary to have separate courts and lawyers to deal the juveniles‘ cases.

Some of the interviewees added that the cases of juveniles must deal in the absence of

the public to prevent them from social stigmatization. However, their cases are heard

in the adult courts in front of public.

One of the interviewee from legal counsels Atif said that;

―Dealing of Juveniles‘ cases in adult courts they may interact with adult

prisoners and makes relationship with them‖.

The interaction of juveniles with adult prisoners for goes a strong relationship

between them and, as a result, adult prisoners provide drugs and other hazardous

things to juveniles. Some juvenile prisoners were habitual drug users. It was also

noted that the adult prisoners used the juvenile inmates for their sexual satisfaction.

Hence, the juvenile prisoners learnt different crimes from adult prisoners due to their

interaction in adult courts. After their release from prison, instead of rehabilitation the

juvenile inmates adopted criminal behavior. This behavior may produce serious

societal problems and contribute to increases in the recidivism rate.

Another participant from the group of legal counsels Ahmad, said that,

―Judges are less in numbers and cases of juveniles are more, then judges take

these cases as burden and do not give time to juvenile cases to judge them

properly‖.

232
 Legal counsel Ahmad said that judges deal all kinds of cases in the courts

whether the cases are civil or criminal. But due to the complex nature of judicial

procedure, they were unable to decide the cases in a reasonable time and the burden of

cases on judges became increased. The interest of judges goes down due to the burden

of cases and cases take too much time to reach the final decision. The final decision of

judges becomes controversial and ambiguous in nature due to lack of interest and

mismanagement of time.

Data from Probation Officers

According to the probation officers there were no exclusive courts in the

whole country for juvenile prisoners. The majority of the interviewees were of the

opinion that juvenile courts are present all over the world and the first juvenile court

was established in Chicago in 1899, but in our country not a single court is present

and nor have positive steps been taken by the policy makers and the government. The

former President Parvez Musharraf has taken positive steps for the rights of juvenile

inmates who introduced JJSO in 2000. According to this ordinance there should be

juvenile courts for juvenile prisoners and these courts should be present in every

district of the country. Some of the probation officers said that due to the lack of

exclusive courts for juvenile inmates, the cases become a burden on judges. They did

not release juvenile inmates on probation; they sent them directly to jail, where the

socialization, rehabilitation and counseling of juvenile prisoners is impossible. Some

of the particiapants added that delays in justice in juvenile cases are also caused by

the lack of exclusive courts. These juveniles are sent to jail where they spend more

time than their sentence. No lawyer was hired for these juvenile inmates by the

government and if parents hired a lawyer he/she does not meet regularly with them.

They were of the opinion that jail staff usually not gives permission to juvenile

233
prisoners to meet with their lawyers and family members. Court police were also

responsible for delays in justice; they did not bring them on proper time in front of

judges; another hurdle was the changing dates of juvenile cases by the concerned

lawyers.

One of the interviewee from the probation officers said that;

―Probation officers are facing hurdles in releasing juveniles on

probation, judges easily not give probation to juveniles because some

of them involved in severe crimes. Probation officers struggle very

hard to satisfy the judges to release juveniles on probation with strong

arguments‖.

Probation officers argued that they faced problems in releasing juveniles on

probation from courts; judges not releasing juveniles on probation when they face the

judge on first time. Probation officers tried their best to release juveniles on probation

instead, they were sent to jail. Judges were fewer in numbers and cases were more

numerous, as judges tried adult, women and juvenile cases. There were no juvenile

courts to handle juvenile cases, due to this, judges do not hear the probation officers

and mostly they give juveniles punishment and send them to jail. But the punishment

is not the right way to deal juveniles. They become further involved in negative

activities and engage in gangs with dangerous criminals. The proper way for the

rehabilitation of juvenile inmates is to release them on probation, as defined in JJSO,

2000 juvenile prisoners should be released on probation instead of jails. Probation

officers argue with judges to release juveniles on probation. When probation officers

are able to talk about the family background and when the crime committed by the

juvenile is not so severe, sometimes judge give permission to release them on

probation.

234
Data from Jail Staff

According to JJSO 2000, there should be minimum of one juvenile court in

every district of the Province. The majority of the interviewees were of the opinion

that there was no single exclusive court for juvenile prisoners in the whole province;

they were facing a lot of problems due to no exclusive court. They further added that

trials of juvenile inmates heard in the adult courts in front of public and they had

neither special court nor special judges to deal their cases. Some of the participants

were of the opinion that this was the failure of the government to not establish the

exclusive courts for them. Some of the participants were of the opinion that

sometimes juvenile inmates interact with adult criminals in the courts, they become

inspire from their protocol or security provided by police to adult prisoners, juveniles

inspired from their protocol and motivated to indulge in negative activities. When

most of the juvenile prisoners are released from jails they become involved in

negative activities and join the dangerous criminal gangs. When they become

involved in criminal activities they become recidivists arrested by the police again and

again. They further added that due to a lack of exclusive courts the cases were delayed

and most of the juvenile inmates were psychologically disturbed and motivated

towards crimes as they were fed up bythe long court processes.

Some of the jail staff said that;

―Cases of juvenile inmates are heard in the adult courts, but they had

special judges on the trial dates of juvenile inmates on that day judges

do not heard the cases of adult prisoners‖.

Interviewees from the jail staff said that juvenile cases were tried in the adult

courts, but they had special judges on their trial dates and on that day only juvenile

235
cases were carried out. They further added that on that day, cases of adult prisoners

were not heard by the judges and cases of juvenile inmates were tried in separate

rooms, not in front of the public.

Discussion on Exclusive Courts

It is clear from the whole discussion of both quantitative variables and

qualitative themes that there were no exclusive courts for juvenile inmates in the

whole country. Both the quantitative and qualitative data confirmed and supported

their results on the basis of no exclusive juvenile courts. Juvenile cases were held in

the adult courts where they were treated as adult prisoners and all juvenile cases were

heard publicly. Respondents also said that their cases were not tried satisfactorily due

to the burden of cases on judges. They mentally suffered along with their families

from the lengthy procedure of the courts. Most of the juvenile prisoners become

recidivists because their cases were heard in the adult courts and they interacted with

adult prisoners.

Consonant views of Juveniles with All Stakeholders of the Justice System

Table No. 4.3.5 is about exclusive courts for juvenile inmates, the researcher

asked juveniles whether their cases are heard in exclusive courts or in adult courts. In

the quantitative data the majority of the juvenile respondents were of the opinion that

there were no exclusive courts for juvenile inmates; they added that their cases were

tried in the adult courts. In the qualitative data all the stakeholders‘ probation officers,

jail staff, juvenile inmates and legal counsels supported and confirmed the results of

quantitative data. All the agents of the justice system said that cases of juvenile

inmates were held in the adult courts because there were no special courts for juvenile

inmates. Legal counsels further added that their cases should have been heard by

236
exclusive judges and on that day, judges should not hear the cases of adult prisoners.

Coley and Barton (2006) supported the findings of both quantitative and qualitative

data. According to them, in the Nineteenth Century in U.S history, children

committed or involved in any unlawful activity were treated the same as adult

prisoners. At the start of the twentieth century, 32 states established juvenile courts

and due to these juvenile courts, the concept of punishment changed into a

rehabilitation process. By 1950, juvenile offenders were tried in juvenile courts in the

U.S. Moreover, the findings of Podkopacz and Feld (1996), Bishop et al. (1996) and

Fagan (1995) also supported the findings of the study that juvenile cases heard in the

adult courts create more problems and also increase the recidivism rate of juvenile

prisoners more than those juvenile inmates whose cases are heard in juvenile courts.

According to Ramzan (2014), Section 4 (1) of JJSO, 2000 federal and provincial

governments have to establish exclusive courts for juvenile prisoners in each district.

From the whole discussion and findings, it is concluded that in JJSO, 2000 it is clear

that there shall be juvenile courts in every district of the province and the cases shall

be tried in juvenile courts, but there is no single court for juvenile inmates in the

whole country to date. Due to a lack of exclusive courts for juvenile prisoners all the

cases were tried in adult courts.

Asked about juvenile inmates are treated as adult criminals in court most of

the juveniles in quantitative data said that they were treated as adult criminals in

court. Judges dealt every prisoner in the same category and consider as dangerous

criminals and rivals of society. The majority of the participants from all stakeholders

in the qualitative data supported and confirmed the results of the quantitative data

they said that in courts every juvenile was dealt with by the judges as adult criminals;

they were not treated as juveniles. Probation officers were of the view that they tried

237
their best to release juveniles on probation. Judges did not hear them and therefore,

juveniles were not released on probation; judges want a strong reason to release them

on probation. They further added that JJSO, 2000 was not applied practically and no

benefit was given to juvenile inmates on the basis of JJSO, 2000 to release them on

probation. Some of legal counsels said that juveniles were should not be dealt with

like adult criminals in court, and when they had trials the concerned judge should not

hear the cases of adult criminals. According to Ramzan (2014), in JJSO, 2000 it is

defined that juvenile inmates should not be treated like adult criminals in the courts.

The facts and findings of Ramzan showed that the ordinance is presenton paper, but in

reality, the juvenile prisoners are treated as adult criminals. Schlossman (1983) also

supported the findings of both quantitative and qualitative data, Schlossman identified

that juvenile cases should not be tried in the adult courts and juvenile inmates should

not be treated as adult prisoners and their hearings should not take place in public.

Due to this, the label of criminal would be placed on juveniles, courts should also not

have not shown the confidential records to the public. It is concluded from the

findings of the statement that juveniles of the sampled jails were treated as adult

prisoners because there were no separate court and judge for juvenile inmates.

Moreover, when juvenile inmates were asked in quantitative strand whether

juvenile prisoners‘ cases heard publicly in the courts, the majority of the respondents

said that their cases were heard publicly in courts, and people sitting in the court heard

each and every word in court about their cases. The results of quantitative data were

confirmed by the findings of different stakeholders in qualitative data; they said that

all cases in the courts were heard publicly. Legal counsels further added that in JJSO,

2000 it is clear that every case of the juvenile inmates should not be heard in front of

other people except their parents and guardians, but due to the lack of exclusive courts

for juvenile inmates, their cases were heard publicly in the court which is the failure

238
of the JJSO, 2000 and the existing government. Rosenheim (1983) identified that in

juvenile justice, it is frequently used that the juvenile trials should be kept anonymous

from the public. According to the National Research Council (2001), the juvenile

justice system was established for the rehabilitation of juveniles, therefore juvenile

trials should not be heard publicly in the court. Kazmi et al. (2013) identified that in

JJSO, 2000 there should be separate juvenile courts in every district of the province in

which the juvenile trials should not be heard publicly. Also, in the JJSO, 2000 the

proceedings of the court should be kept anonymous to prevent the stigmatization of

juvenile inmates. It is concluded from the results of the study that in the whole

country, there is no single juvenile court after the introduction of JJSO in 2000. Due

to a lack of court for juvenile inmates in Pakistan, all juvenile trials are heard publicly

in the adult courts.

When asked about juvenile cases tried satisfactorily in the adult courts, the

majority of the juvenile respondents in the quantitative data said that their cases were

not heard in a satisfactory manner and their cases were delayed by judges and

lawyers. The findings were supported and confirmed by the results of probation

officers, juvenile inmates, jail staff and legal counsels in qualitative data. Their results

showed that cases of juvenile inmates were not heard in a satisfactory manner because

there were no exclusive judges nor were there special juvenile courts. They further

added that judges were over burdened with cases and the limited numbers of judges

also created problems. They were not able to hear every case in a satisfactory manner

or could they give time to read through each case. According to Stahl et al. (1999),

one third of juvenile cases do not receive court processing. Due to the burden on adult

courts and lack of separate juvenile courts, the cases were pending and the juvenile

cases not tried satisfactorily in adult courts.

239
 Furthermore, juvenile inmates responded about mental health issues which

were caused due to the lengthy and costly procedure of the court. The majority of the

respondents said that they were psychologically disturbed from the lengthy procedure

of the courts. They further added that most of the juvenile inmates were arrested for

minor offenses, yet they were treated as severe kind of criminals at jail. In court some

of the juvenile inmates said that lawyers changed the dates and sometime the

opposing lawyer did not come to court, and judges changed trial dates. Cases of

juvenile inmates were delayed from the lengthy process of the courts. Different

stakeholders who offered qualitative data said that most juvenile inmates did not feel

secure in the jail and also during the court process; they faced psychological problems

like anxiety, frustration and tension. They further added that lengthy court procedures

also harmed other members of juveniles‘ families mentally and financially. Legal

counsels in qualitative data said that juvenile inmates had no exclusive courts whereas

according to JJSO, 2000 there should be exclusive courts for juveniles in every

district of the province. Over burdened judges don't give proper time to every case,

which causes delay, and then juvenile inmates suffer mentally from delayed justice

and lengthy court procedures. Previous literature supported and confirmed both the

results of quantitative and qualitative study. According to Kazmi et al. (2013), due to

the lack of availability of juvenile courts in Pakistan, the cases and trials become a

burden on the existing adult courts. JJSO, 2000 clarifies that there must be juvenile

courts in each district of the province, but to date there is no single court present in

whole country. All the cases are heard publicly in the adult courts. Juvenile trials are

also delayed by the numerous adult trials. Due to these delays, they become mentally

disturbed and, in some jails, juvenile inmates attempt to commit suicide due to the

lengthy and costly procedures of the courts.

Asked about the recidivism rate increase because of the association of juvenile

inmates with adult prisoners in courts, the majority of the juveniles in quantitative

data replied that there were no special courts for juvenile inmates and their cases were

240
tried in the adult courts where they meet and interact with adult prisoners. They see

the protocol given by the police to adult prisoners then some of the juvenile inmates

are inspired by them, they share and learn new techniques of crimes from adult

prisoners. In the qualitative data probation officers, jail staff, juvenile prisoners and

legal counsels supported and confirmed the findings of quantitative data. They were

of the view that in other countries juvenile inmates have separate courts to face the

judges where adult prisoners‘ cases not heard. In Pakistan there is no special court for

juvenile inmates, cases heard in adult courts which are against the JJSO, 2000. They

further added that juvenile inmates meet with adult criminals on trial dates in court

where they learn criminal behaviors from them and when they are released from jail,

juveniles again commit crimes. They join the company of unsavory people involve in

negative activities and become recidivists. Previous literature also supported and

confirmed the results of both quantitative and qualitative data of the study. According

to Podkopacz and Feld (1996), juvenile cases heard in adult courts increased the

recidivism rates of juveniles more than those juvenile prisoners whose cases were

heard in juvenile courts. It is concluded from the results of the study that trying cases

of juvenile inmates in adult courts the increases the recidivism rate in juveniles. They

become exposed to other people and also they meet with adult criminals in courts.

They interact with adults in result they are attracted to them and the way they conduct

crimes. They learn from adult prisoners and this is a major source of recidivism.

It is concluded from the whole results of the quantitative and qualitative data

that juvenile inmates live a hazardous life at jails and also they become discouraged

and mentally disturbed from the lengthy and costly procedure of the courts. Aside

from these issues, there is no proper legal counsels for juveniles to carry out their

cases even though parents and guardians helped their children paid fees to private

lawyers to manage and try their children‘s cases in courts.

241
 4.3.6 Association between Relation of Juveniles with Gangsters and Well-being of
Juveniles

Well-being of Juveniles
Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Total Statistics
(%) (%) know (%) (%)
Juveniles interact Agree 60(45.5) 51(38.6) 04(3.0) 115(87.1) (p=0.000)
frequently with the adult Disagree 02(1.5) 07(5.3) 03(2.3) 12(9.1) (χ2=21.805)
criminals at jail Don‘t 00 03(2.3) 02(1.5) 05(3.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The jail staff has proper Agree 02(1.5) 08(8.1) 00 10(7.6) (p=0.007)
checks and balances on Disagree 43(32.6) 48(36.4) 05(3.8) 96(72.7) (χ2=14.232)
interaction of juveniles Don‘t 17(12.9) 05(3.8) 04(3.0) 26(19.4)
with adult criminals Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles are frank with Agree 56(42.4) 61(46.2) 07(5.3) 124(93.9) (p=0.000)
the adult criminals at jail Disagree 06(4.5) 00 01(0.8) 07(5.3) (χ2=20.286)
Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juvenile prisoners are Agree 43(32.6) 48(36.4) 08(6.1) 99(75.0) (p=0.000)
using cigarette, snuff, Disagree 19(14.4) 13(9.8) 00 32(24.2) (χ2=17.719)
hashish or marijuana etc. Don‘t 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8)
at the jail Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Adult criminals are giving Agree 56(42.4) 54(40.9) 06(4.5) 116(87.9) (p=0.001)
cigarette, snuff, hashish or Disagree 05(3.8) 07(5.3) 01(0.8) 13(9.8) (χ2=18.150)
marijuana or cash money
to juveniles at jail Don‘t 01(0.8) 00 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles have relation Agree 61(46.2) 59(44.7) 06(4.5) 126(95.5) (p= 0.000)
with the gangs at the jail Disagree 00 00 01(0.8) 01(0.8) (χ2=23.404)
Don‘t 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 02(1.5) 05(3.8)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Cigarette, Naswar and Agree 57(43.2) 53(40.2) 05(3.8) 115(87.1) (p=0.000)
Marijuana are any time Disagree 01(0.8) 01(0.8) 03(2.3) 05(3.8) (χ2=24.350)
available to the gangs Don‘t 04(3.0) 07(5.3) 01(0.8) 12(9.1)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
Juveniles join gangs Agree 51(38.6) 55(41.7) 05(3.8) 111(84.1) (p=0.000)
because of physical and Disagree 11(8.3) 05(3.8) 02(1.5) 18(13.6) (χ2=21.017)
financial support Don‘t 00 01(0.8) 02(1.5) 03(2.3)
Total 62(47.0) 61(46.2) 09(6.8) 132(100)
The figure in the table denotes frequency while figure in parenthesis denotes percentage. The
symbol (P) represents the significance level and (χ2) represents the value of chi square.

242
 Table No. 4.3.6 is about the relation of juvenile inmates with gangsters at jail.

Juvenile inmates were asked whether they interacted with adult criminals at jail where

a highly significant (p=0.000) association was correlated with the well-being of

juveniles. The significant association showed that juveniles interact frequently with

adult criminals. It is concluded that juveniles interact frequently with gangsters

because they feel cut off from their society; they interact with adult criminals at jail

for support.

A significant (p=0.007) association was found with the proper checks and

balances of jail staff on the interaction of juveniles with adult criminals. The findings

showed that jail staff had no proper checks and balances on the interaction of

juveniles with adult criminals as they meet freely with them at jail.

Moreover, when juvenile respondents were asked whether they were frank

with adult gangsters at jail, most of the juveniles were in agreement with the

statement where ahighly significant (p=0.000) association was observed the well-

being of juveniles. The findings showed that due to no proper checks and balances

from jail staff, juveniles meet with adult criminals and they were frank with them.

A highly significant (p=0.000) association was observed with the use of

substances such as cigarette, snuff, hashish or marijuana by juvenile inmates. Jail staff

and adult criminals provided drugs to juveniles. Most of the respondents were of the

view that when they came to jail, they did not know about any type of drugs but here

at jail they started to take drugs like hashish, marijuana, cigarette and the most severe

kind of drugs, such as opium, were used at sampled jails.

A significant (p=0.001) association was found with adult criminals who gave

cigarettes, snuff, hashish or marijuana or cash money to juveniles. It is concluded that

juveniles were in interaction with adult criminals in sampled jails, they were sharing

everything with them including all types of drugs.

243
 A highly significant (p=0.000) association was observed with juveniles who

had relations with the gangs at jail. It is concluded from the findings of the statement

that those juveniles whose attachments were low with their social worlds, family,

teachers, and those whose attachment were strong to their delinquent friends were

strong in relation with attachment to members of the gangs.

Similarly, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was found when asked

whether cigarettes, naswar and marijuana were available to the gangs. It is concluded

that in gangs all types of drugs are easily available; therefore, juveniles were

vulnerable to gangs and jail life.

Furthermore, a highly significant (p=0.000) association was found between the

joining of gangs by juveniles and the physical and financial support which they were

getting from the other members of the gangs. The results showed that mostly those

juveniles who join the gangs were financially weak and want to earn some money. It

is concluded from the above data that due to no exclusive jails for juveniles and lack

of any proper checks and balances of the jail staff, juveniles frequently interact with

adult criminals and also they were frank with them. Due to the lack of special jails for

juveniles, adult criminals were also in the same jails, where they used drugs and

provided these drugs to juveniles. These juveniles are also led to join gangs because

of the different kinds of drugs available to the members of the gangs.

Relation of Juveniles with Gangsters (Theme)

Data from Juvenile Prisoners

The jail environment has many aspects which all have an influence on juvenile

prisoners. When juveniles interact with adult prisoners, it affects their personality and

their reformation. In the sampled jails of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, there were no

244
exclusive jails for juvenile inmates. All types of prisoners, including women,

juveniles and adult male prisoners lived in the combined jails. The majority of the

juvenile participants said that juveniles and adult prisoners lived in the same jails,

they interacted and had strong relations with each other. Juvenile inmates lived in a

barrack named Munda Khana and adult prisoners in another barrack, but due to a lack

of strict rules and regulations, they freely meet with each other. According to juvenile

prisoners, adult criminals told them that if they face any problem, they would manage

and solve the problems of juvenile prisoners. Some of the interviewees said that adult

prisoners also give drugs and money to them and some of juveniles meet with adults

at night and are sexually abused by the adult gangsters. Juvenile prisoners shared their

feelings with gangsters and also learned new techniques of crimes from them. Some

of juveniles said that adult gangsters teach them new ways and skills of committing

crimes. They also said that if jail staff did not allow them to meet with adult

gangsters, then they provide money to them. Gangsters also had strong relations with

jail staff. These all were against the JJSO, 2000 which mandated that juveniles should

be living away from adult criminals, but there were no practical implementations of

the JJSO, 2000.

One of the juvenile participants Shakil said that;

―I have strong relations with adult criminals and for the third time I

committed a crime and judge sent me to jail. I have adult friends at jail.

I share everything with them. Some juveniles have sexual relations

with adult criminals‖.

Juveniles had strong relation with adult prisoners they freely met with them.

There were no strict checks and balances from the jail staff. Juveniles and adult

245
gangsters had separate cells, but they meet freely with each other. When juveniles or

gangsters wanted to meet with each other they gave some money or any other thing as

a compensation/bribe to jail staff who then allowed them to meet with adult gangsters.

They had friendships with adult gangsters. They shared everything with them and

learned new techniques and skills of committing crimes. Also, juveniles engaged in

sexual activities with gangsters.

The jail environment was found inappropriate for minor inmates where there

were no checks and balances over their interaction and relationships with adult

prisoners. Juveniles were free to interact with them; therefore, their frequent

interaction had negative impacts on their personality development.

Another interviewee Fahad, from the juvenile prisoners said that;

―Adult prisoners are frank and we discuss with them if we face any

kind of problem. Some of our juvenile friends are frank enough that

they are taking cigarette and snuff from adult criminals‖.

The deepness of relationship of juveniles with adult prisoners was very clear

from the statements of the juvenile prisoners. Some of them enjoyed cigarettes and

hashish with the adult prisoners. They might have inspired by those hardened

criminals who were incarcerated in severe crimes and some criminals might have

links with gangs at jail. They also joined the gangs to protect themselves from sexual

violence and other harmful threats from adult prisoners and jail staff; they then

became permanent members of the gangs. Adult gangsters provide drugs like hashish,

cigarette, naswar and opium to juveniles. These relationships had very negative

impacts for juveniles who might become hardened criminals after release from jails.

246
Data from Legal Counsels

Juvenile prisoners lived in the same jail with adult criminals. The jail authority

had strict rules preventing adult criminals from meeting with juveniles in the jail, but

due to the lack of availability of exclusive jails and borstal institutions for juvenile

inmates, they lived in the same jail and sometimes they interacted with each other.

The majority of the legal counsels were of the opinion that it is clear in the JJSO

2000, that there should be minimum one borstal institution for juvenile inmates in

every district of the province. Juveniles should not spend their incarceration time in

the same jails with adult criminals, but the government had not taken practical steps to

establish borstal institutions for juvenile prisoners. They further added that juveniles

meet with adult prisoners at jails and these meetings motivated juvenile inmates to

become involved in negative activities, they also provided drugs like powder, hashish

and cigarettes to juvenile inmates. Moreover, they said that mostly adult criminals

commit sexual activities with them with the help of jail staff by giving them some

money. They further elaborated that in Pakistan there is no juvenile court to deal with

their cases; their cases were tried in the same adult court.

Few of the legal counsels said that;

―Juvenile prisoners interact with adult criminals and when they release

from jail, they become dangerous criminals due to this the recidivism

rate increased in the juveniles‖.

Participants were of the view that juvenile inmates freely interact with adult

criminals and also they are frank with them. They further added that some of the

juvenile inmates had relationship with adult gangs out of jail in their area upon their

release from jail and they were motivated by them to commit crimes due to their

247
financial problems. And also, in the gangs juveniles used drugs and weapons. When

they are arrested by the police and judges send them to jail, they want to join the same

environment as before their incarceration and join the gangs at jail. They further said

that when they are released from jail, they practically applied their learnt behavior

from gangsters. Juveniles became involved in negative activities, joined the gangs

outside and their recidivism rate increased.

Data from Probation Officers

Adult and juvenile prisoners were living in the same jails; sometimes they met

and interacted with each other. The majority of the probation officers were of the

view that due to a lack of exclusive jails for juvenile prisoners, adult males and

females and juveniles lived in the same jails with dangerous criminals. They further

added that juvenile inmates told them that the jail authority does not take care of

juvenile prisoners; some of them frequently meet with adult criminals. Juveniles had

separate barracks, but sometimes adult criminals meet with them with the permission

of jail authorities who took bribes. Some of the participants said that juvenile inmates

learned negative acts from adult gangsters, for example, they used cigarette, hashish,

marijuana, and powder. They further added that when they are released from jails they

become gangsters and dangerous criminals. They join gangs for financial and physical

support and also used guns, because they felt socially marginalized and neglected by

the society. They further said that when comparing the juveniles released on probation

they observed very positive behavior. Juveniles released on probation were not

marginalized in the society. Due to rehabilitation, reformation and counseling of the

probation officers and their attachment with their family, juveniles released on

probation become positive members of the society.

248
One of the interviewee from the probation officers said that;

―Juveniles have relation with adult criminals at jail, they learn negative

acts from them and when they release from jail, they involve in

criminal activities and using drugs, etc. They become professional

criminals which are more dangerous for society and the more

important they become recidivist‖.

One of the interviewee from probation officers said that those juveniles who

are sent to jail instead of placed on a period of probation become close with adult

criminals, they learn and share negative acts with adult criminals. Moreover, he added

that mostly juvenile inmates are sexually abused by the adult criminals with the help

of corrupt jail staff; they take money from adults and give permission to meet with

juvenile inmates. Adult criminals provide drugs in different forms to juvenile inmates

and when they are released from jail, they become involved in harmful activities and

make or join a group of gangsters and use modern and sophisticated weapons. He

further added that most of them become recidivists and are sent again to jails.

Probation officers said that probation was the only way to rehabilitate juvenile

inmates very easily through counseling.

Data from Jail Staff

A person is known by the company he keeps. The surrounding environment

has a greater impact on the personality development of an individual. If a person joins

a good peer group, his personality will develop in a good manner and vice versa. Jail

is also a part of the society and it greatly influences the behavior of the prisoners. Jail

serves as a tool of reformation and personality development in the behavior of the

juvenile prisoners. The researcher found that there were no separate jails for juveniles

249
and they were kept in the same jails with adult prisoners. The jail staff dealt with the

adult criminals and the juvenile prisoners in the same harsh manner. This treatment

had a great impact on the juvenile personality and they often tended to show more

negative and aggressive behavior when they were released.

The majority of the participants said that that there were no separate jails for

juvenile inmates in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Due to the lack of exclusive jails for

juvenile prisoners they were kept in the same jails with adult prisoners under the

supervision of jail staff. Some of the interviewees said that juvenile prisoners were

kept in separate barracks (Munda Khana) from adult prisoners and they had no

relation with adult criminals. Juveniles were strictly prohibited to meet with adult

criminals and if someone from them meets with adult prisoners then they were

punished.

One of the interviewee from the jail staff said that;

―Juvenile prisoners meet and interact with adult criminals for some

time during pray time on Jumma Mubarak. They pray together along

with jail staff and sometime few of jail staff allowed adult prisoners to

meet with juvenile inmates‖.

According to the participant, juvenile prisoners were strongly prohibited to

meet and talk with adult criminals, also they had separate barracks they did not see

each other. He further added that sometimes adult criminals meet with juvenile

inmates with the permission of jail staff due to their family relationship with juvenile

prisoners. For example, adult prisoners could meet with their sons, brothers or a

family cousin. He further added that during prayer time on Jumma Mubarak adult

prisoners interacted with juvenile prisoners, jail staff also prayed together with them.

250
Some of the interviewees from jail staff said that:
―Some of the juveniles are engaged with adult criminals and using

marijuana and other narcotic drugs and some of them shows tendency

to join adult gangs while they set free‖.

Some of the jail staff stated that some of the juveniles were in relation with

adult criminals and were using different types of narcotics such as cigarette, snuff,

and marijuana which adult prisoners provided them by taking money from juvenile

prisoners. They further added thata few of the juveniles were in strong relation with

adult criminals. They were motivated to join gangs after they were released from jails.

Some of the juvenile inmates hadthe same result in the jail, they joined the gangs and

after some time they became recidivists and became severe criminals.

Discussion on Relation of Juveniles with Adult Gangsters

It is clear from the overall results of quantitative and qualitative data that due

to the lack of exclusive jails or borstal institutions for juvenile inmates, they spent

their sentence in the adult jails where they interacted with adult prisoners and jail staff

had no proper checks and balances over their interaction. Adult criminals were so

frank with juvenile prisoners they gave them naswar, cigarettes and hashish. They

also had relations with members of the dangerous gangs in their areas where they had

kept sophisticated guns and arms, became involved in negative activities and joined

gangs for their financial and physical support. Both the quantitative and qualitative

data supported and confirmed each other‘s results, except for jail staff in some results

in the qualitative data where jail staff said that they had checks and balances over

their interaction and also they did not allow any type of drugs in the jurisdiction of the

jail.

251
Inconsonant Views of Juveniles, Probation officers and Legal Counsels with Jail
Staff

Table No. 4.3.6 is about the relation of juvenile prisoners with gangsters

whereas in quantitative data the majority of the juvenile respondents said that they

interacted frequently with adult criminals because they lived at the same jail with

adult prisoners. They further added that they had separate barracks at the jail, but they

metand interacted freely with adult inmates. All stakeholders of the justice system

except jail staff supported and confirmed the findings of quantitative data collected

from juvenile inmates. They said that they had no separate jails, they lived in the same

jail with adult criminals; they interacted and met frequently with each other. Jail staff

in qualitative data rejects both the results and said that they had separate barracks

called Munda khana where only juvenile inmates lived. They further added that they

had checks and balances over their interaction, jail staff did not allow adult prisoners

to meet with juvenile inmates. According to Vigil and Long (1990), when juveniles

enter to jail life they feel marginalized and depressed, because they feel lonely, they

want to find a friend for themselves. Due to these reasons, they may join a group or a

gang to give them a sense of identity. Furthermore, Jackson and McBride (1985) and

Ralph et al. (1996) explain that whenever there are adult criminals exist in the jails

with juveniles, then the relationships between juveniles and adult gangs are deeper.

According to the findings of Thornberry (1998), due to the frequent interaction of

juveniles with adult criminals, the participation of juveniles in gangs increases and

participation in negative activities also increases. It is concluded from the findings

and discussion that juveniles cut off from society and feeling alone at jails interact

with adult criminals at jail for their satisfaction and as a way to pass time.

252
 When asked about checks and balances of jail staff over the interaction of

juveniles with adult prisoners, in quantitative data the majority of the juveniles said

that there were no checks and balances over their interaction with adult prisoners. All

agents except jail staff in qualitative data supported and confirmed the results of

quantitative data. Some of the interviewees added that jail staff took bribes from

prisoners as compensation to allow them to interact with other prisoners. Jail staff

rejected the findings and said that they had proper checks and balances over the

interaction of juveniles with adult prisoners. They had separate barracks they not meet

and interact with each other. Some of the participants in qualitative data added that if

juveniles had relatives or family members in the adult barracks then they could meet

them with the permission of jail authorities. According to Akbar and Bhutta (2012),

jail staff were not doing their duties properly; they have no proper checks and

balances over their interactions. The jail staff takes bribes from juveniles and adult

prisoners when they want to meet with each other, juveniles are sexually abused at

jails due to no proper checks and balances on prisoners.

Moreover, when asked about frankness of juveniles with adult criminals, most

of the juveniles in quantitative data said that they were frank with adult prisoners

because they lived in the same jail where juveniles met and interacted with adults and

they had a strong relationship with adult criminals. In qualitative data all stakeholders

supported and confirmed the quantitative results except jail staff. All agents of the

justice system said that the jail staff had no checks and balances over juvenile

inmates. They had strong relationships with adult prisoners. Some of the participants

added that adult prisoners sexually exploit the juvenile inmates with the help of jail

staff and other juvenile friends. The findings of Jackson and McBride (1985) and

Ralph et al. (1996) showed that when there are adult criminals in the same jails where

253
juveniles also exist then they are frank and deeper in relationship. The findings of

Vigil and Long (1990) were also in the support of the findings; according to them, due

to feeling of marginalization, juveniles who are desperate for connection interact with

adult criminals. They join the group of adults and living frankly with them. It is

concluded from the above findings that due to feeling marginalized, juveniles want to

interact with other prisoners, and then they interact freely with adult criminals.

Asked whether juvenile prisoners used drugs, the majority of the juvenile

respondents in the quantitative data said that most of the juvenile inmates used

cigarettes, snuff and marijuana. All stakeholders except jail staff in qualitative data

supported and confirmed the results of quantitative data. Agents of the justice system

said that juvenile inmates used different types of drugs at jail. They further added that

jail is considered a mini society where everything is available. Furthermore, prisoners

give money and take drugs at jail. Some of the juvenile respondents said that they did

not know about drugs before they were incarcerated but after they spent some time at

jail they knew about the drugs. Moreover, they said that sometime jail staff arranged

drugs for them. In response they would give money or any other thing to them. Jail

staff in qualitative data did not supportthe findings of quantitative data. They said that

there were no drugs used. They had checks and balances over these things; they did

not allow any type of illegal thing which is forbidden in the jurisdiction of the jail.

Some previous literature supported both the results. According to the findings of

Kosterman et al. (1996) and Thornberry (1998), drugs are easily available at jails. In

fact, jail is considered a mini society where everything is available with the help of

jail staff. Juvenile prisoners pay money to them and any type of drugs are provided to

them at the jail. It is concluded that when juveniles pay money, jail staff and adult

criminals provide any type of drugs to them. In the sampled jails of KP, most of the

254
interviewees were of the view that when they entered/came to jail they did not know

about any type of drugs but in the jail environment, they have started to take drugs

like hashish, marijuana, cigarette, powder, chars and opium, which is the most severe

kind of drug used in sampled jails.

Asked about the drugs which were provided to juveniles, the majority of the

juvenile respondents said that they met with adult criminals and took drugs from

them. They further added that when juveniles who were not provided with their own

drugs needed them, then they met with adult criminals who arranged for them. All

stakeholders except jail staff in qualitative data confirmed and supported the results of

quantitative data and said that adult criminals had relationships with jail authorities

who provided them different types of drugs. Adult prisoners gave money to juveniles

and told them if they need any other thing or face any problem then to let them know.

Jail staff did not support both the results and said that they haven't allowed any type of

drugs at jail. They further added that adult criminals had separate barracks where

juveniles are not allowed to meet with adult inmates. The findings of Evans et al.

(2006) were supported the results. According to them at jails juveniles and adults live

like a family. They share each and everything with each other because of the sense of

belongingness and acceptance. Adult prisoners use drugs they also give these drugs to

juvenile prisoners. The findings of Thornberry (1998) also support the results, his

findings showed that when juveniles join jails they interact with adult criminals and

they follow the adult criminals in every step. They use drugs provided by the adult

criminals. It is concluded from the findings that juveniles had interactions with adult

criminals in sampled jails and they shared everything with each other. Many types of

drugs were used freely at jails where the adult prisoners provided these drugs to

juveniles.

255
 Asked about the relationship of juveniles with the gangs, the majority of the

juvenile respondents in quantitative data said that they had strong relations with gangs

and spent more time and shared everything with the gang members. All stakeholders

except jail staff in qualitative data said that due to relations with bad company they

engaged in negative activities. They added that when they are released from jails they

join gangs which further leads to recidivism. On the other hand, jail staff reported that

there were no gangs and juveniles were not even allowed to interact with adult

prisoners. They further added that they had no information of the relationships of

juvenile outside of jail premises. According to Thornberry (1998), juvenile

participation in gangs results in the increase of negative activities. It is found that for

those juveniles who join the gangs, their participation and relationship with gangs and

negative activities increased mainly in aggressive activities and drug sales. According

to Thornberry, the societal risk factor is rising because of the involvement of gangs

where the level of social attachment with the family is low (1998). Among family

variables, low parental attachment to the child and poverty all increase the possibility

of gang membership. Absence of biological parents, low parental supervision, low

attachment to teachers, low student commitment to school, low expectations for

success in the chill and low attachment to a peer group had also a strong impact on

association with a gang. Associating with delinquent friends, easy access to drugs,

numerous negative life events, low self-esteem and depressive symptoms were also

strong factors leading to attachment with gangsters. Juveniles who become involved

in delinquency and use drugs, mainly brutal delinquent acts, are more likely to

become gang members. It is concluded from the findings that those juveniles whose

attachments were low to the social world or their family, teachers, and those whose

attachments were strong to their delinquent friends, tended to have strong relation

with gangs and become members of the gangs.

256
 Furthermore, asked about drugs available to the gangs at jail, the majority of

the juvenile respondents in quantitative data were of the view that many types of

drugs were available because they had their own worlds, their own groups, and also

their relations with adult prisoners was a strong source of the availability of drugs.

Agents of the justice system except jail staff said that juveniles were a neglected

segment of the society. Their social marginalization led them to join gangs where they

had power, money and many types of drugs like hashish, naswar, cigarettes, and

powder. On other hand, jail staff had no information about the outside gangs.

Ingraham and Wellford (1987) found that gangs dominate the drug business, which

resulted in the prevalence of violence at jail. The findings of Sanchez-Jankowski

(1991) contended that gang members also provide opportunities for making money,

such as the chance for and excitement of selling drugs. Thus, juveniles see themselves

as making a choice in deciding to connect with a gang, when juvenile use drugs they

perceive their personal advantages in attachment with gangs where drugs are easily

available. Dawood and Zafar (2003) also supported the results as according to them,

the elite class children who are attracted to use drugs for fun become involved in

gangs which are dangerous for society.

When asked whether juveniles join gangs for physical and financial support,

the majority of the juvenile respondents in the quantitative data said that they had no

money and are very poor so they joined the gangs for their personal benefit.

Qualitative data supported and confirmed the quantitative results. All stakeholders

except jail staff said that most of the juveniles join the gangs from very poor and

marginalized families. Most of the juveniles were the bread winner of their family.

They needed financial and physical support which they obtained from the gangs

where they felt secure and regarded the gangs as fulfilling all the basic needs. Under

257
the qualitative data, jail staff rejected the presence of gangs at jail. They also said that

they had check and balance over the activities of juveniles and other inmates.

According to the findings of Moore (1978), juveniles have no choice about joining

gangs; some are born into gangs as a result of local traditions, culture and their

parents‘ involvement in criminal activity. According to Short and Strodtbeck (1965),

juveniles join gangs because they feel helpless, gangs give them a way of solving

their adjustment problems and help them in trials. Dawley (1992) and Keiser (1969)

also supported the results and wrote that membership in the gang is also important for

juveniles because these juveniles want to protect themselves from other dangerous

inmates.

It is concluded from the whole findings and discussion of the data that due to

the lack of exclusive jails for juvenile prisoners and no proper checks and balances of

the jail staff, juveniles frequently interact with other adult criminals. Due to the lack

of special jails for juveniles, adult gangsters were also in the same jails where adult

criminals in gangs used drugs and they provided drugs to juveniles. In short, juveniles

joined gangs for physical and financial support, and because they were feeling

insecure without any group of friends or family members at jail.

258
Chapter-V

SUMMARY CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

This study was conducted on the juvenile prisoners of sampled jails of Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa, to find out multiple aspects of inappropriate jail environment and to

understand the negative effects of those incongruous aspects on the well-being of

juvenile inmates.

In the quantitative portion of the study, juvenile inmates were of the opinion

that there was no separate bed for sleeping. They lived in a congested place where

they slept on the hard floor without any bed, foam/mattress and blanket. In the

qualitative segment of the study juvenile inmates, legal counsels, jail staff and

probation officers supported all the results of the quantitative study. Furthermore,

there was a severe problem of clean drinking and potable water in the sampled jails of

KP. All agents of the justice system agreed that there was no clean water, but the jail

staff rejected and said that they provide clean and enough water to the prisoners. On

the heading of the toilet facilities provided to juvenile inmates, all the stakeholders of

the justice system agreed that there were no proper toilet facilities. Moreover, there

was not enough and hygienically food provided to the juvenile inmates. All the agents

of the justice system except the jail staff agreed in the qualitative study, they added

that most of the diseases caused by the unhygienic food. There was a positive

response from juveniles and agents of the justice system that the sanitation and

ventilation system was good in the sampled jails of KP.

259
 In the second variable/theme of the study, the researcher asked about the

attitude of the jail staff that how they treated in the jail. Juveniles replied to multiple

answers that jail staff not treated them well, they not provided any type of welfare to

juvenile inmates. There were no correction and rehabilitation facilities provided to

juveniles. Jail staff treated them in a cruel and in-humiliating way, they beat the

juveniles with steel rods, feet, and sticks. The in-humiliating practices of the jail staff

produce negative effects on the well-being of the juvenile inmates. The unhealthy

behavior of the jail staff promotes criminal tendencies in the juveniles. Most of the

jail staff involved in taking bribes from juvenile inmates when they need something or

to meet with their family members and the lawyers. Jail staff not provided any type of

ethics or manners to juveniles. All the stakeholders in the qualitative data supported

the views of the juvenile inmates in the quantitative portion that juveniles sent to jail

for rehabilitation, but the jail staff treated them like animals. After spending time in

jail most of the juveniles become the most dangerous criminals and want revenge

from the jail staff. On the other hand, jail staff rejected all the views of the

respondents that they blame the jail staff. They treated the juveniles like their own

children, they did not beat them, and jail staff provided all the available facilities to

the juvenile inmates in the sampled jails.

Juvenile prisoners added that space is not enough for the prisoners they live in

a congested place. Most of the time disharmony situation created due to

overcrowdedness in the sampled jails. The statement was supported by all the

stakeholders in the qualitative portion of the study. Furthermore, juveniles reported

that there were no outdoor recreational facilities provided to juveniles, there was no

playground in the jails. In the qualitative segment of the study probation officers,

legal counsels, juvenile inmates supported the views of the juveniles in the

260
quantitative portion that there were no outdoor games for juveniles. Jail staff added

that they provided indoor recreational facilities to juveniles like ludo, television, and

badminton. Moreover, juveniles added that jail life disturbs their normal lives, they

not provided skill development programs. The most important when they become ill

jail staff not provided the basic medical facilities to those juvenile inmates. All the

stakeholders agreed with the views of the juveniles in the quantitative portion of the

study, jail staff not agreed only on the medical facilities that they provided the basic

first aid to juvenile inmates. Jail staff further added that the medical officers available

anytime in the jail.

Juvenile prisoners were asked about the multiple aspects of court delays which

potentially prolonged their imprisonment and suits under the variable of the delayed

justice system. The majority of juveniles said that they had no knowledge of those

rights and privileges to which they were entitled under the law/JJSO, 2000. This

finding was supported through qualitative data by juvenile prisoners, jail staff,

probation officers and legal counsels. The majority of the juvenile inmates reported

that they were not happy with the behavior of police at the time of their conviction.

Police bullying and beating them with feet and sticks, this finding was supported

through qualitative data by all the stakeholders of the justice system. Furthermore,

most of the respondents added that their family members supported them in their

litigation process. The government did not provide any free legal assistance to

juvenile inmates, most of them committed pity crimes but they were waiting for the

trials for a long time. In the qualitative study, the interviewees supported the

quantitative results except the legal counsels. They added that when there is no private

lawyer to defend the juveniles‘ cases then juveniles applied for free legal assistance to

the magistrate and then magistrate provide public prosecutors to defend their cases.

261
Juveniles further added that delays in justice system had adverse effects on the

juvenile inmates. Most of the juveniles said that they faced the corrupt behavior of the

jail staff. They demanded something as bribe from juveniles as access to the judges on

their trial dates. In the qualitative segment, all stakeholders supported the result but

jail staff not agreed with their views and added that this is the duty of the court police

to bring juveniles to the courts on proper time.

Asking juveniles about the environment of adult courts relative to exclusive

courts (mentioned in JJSO, 2000) where their cases were tried under the variable of

no exclusive courts. Most of the juveniles said that their cases were tried at the adult

courts where the finding was supported through qualitative data by all the agents of

the justice system. Juveniles were treated as adult criminals in the court where the

finding supported through qualitative data by all the stakeholders. Moreover,

probation officers said that they tried to release juveniles on probation, but they

always faced hurdles from the judges‘ side, as they did not release juveniles on

probation without a solid reason. Furthermore, legal counsels added that judges hear

the cases of juveniles on a special day and on that specific day; judges don‘t hear the

cases of adult criminals. Furthermore, juveniles added that their cases heard publicly

and not satisfactory, judges not give proper time to juveniles to express their views.

These findings supported by all the respondents in the qualitative portion of the study.

The lengthy process of the trials suffered most of the juveniles mentally, financially

and become recidivist if release from jail all participants in qualitative portion of the

study supported the results. Legal counsels further added that not only the juveniles,

but their families too suffered mentally and financially from the lengthy process of the

courts in Pakistan.

262
 Juveniles were asked different questions regarding their relations with

gangsters in jail. Majority of the respondents agreed with the statement that they

interact frequently with adult prisoners in jail. Jail staff had no checks and balances

over juvenile interactions with adult criminals. All other stakeholders in qualitative

data except jail staff supported the above findings. Jail staff denied the results of the

remaining respondents and said that there were check and balance over the activities

of juvenile inmates. Moreover, juvenile prisoners added that jail staff took bribes

sometimes in return for letting adult prisoners met with juveniles. Juvenile inmates

who reported that they were frank with the adult prisoners at jail All other

stakeholders in qualitative results except jail staff supported the above findings, the

jail staff declared it as a false allegation on them. The majority of the juvenile

interviewees confirmed that juvenile prisoners were using cigarettes, snuff, hashish or

marijuana at the jail. All interviewees in qualitative data supported the results of the

quantitative data except jail staff who declared that neither can inmates use drug nor

drugs are available in jail. Juveniles said that they had relations with the gangs at the

jail, they meet them freely with the help of the jail staff. Other respondents in

qualitative data supported the results of the quantitative variable except the jail staff

who added that due to the bad company in jail, juveniles engage in criminal activities.

On the other hand, jail staff reported that there was no gang and juveniles were not

allowed even to interact with other prisoners in the jail. Furthermore, juvenile

respondents said that cigarettes, naswar, and marijuana were available any time to the

gangs. All the stakeholders supported the finding except jail staff, who said that there

were strict rules and any type of drugs, was not allowed on the jail premises. Finally,

juveniles linked the joining of gangs by them due to a need for physical and financial

support. All other stakeholders of qualitative results except jail staff supported the

263
quantitative finding. Jail staff was of the view that in jail there was no gangs present

and juveniles not allowed to meet with adult prisoners because they live in separate

barracks.

While asking juveniles about the negative effects of inappropriate jail

environment on the well-being of juveniles in general and about social

marginalization specifically, the majority of the respondents declared that they were

excluded from participation in social gatherings or other activities of the society and

then they look for crimes. The qualitative data of all stakeholders supported the above

findings. Some juveniles who were against the statement that they experienced

domestic violence before they became criminal/delinquents. In the qualitative portion

of the study, all the stakeholders except juveniles were of the view that they didn‘t

have any knowledge about the domestic environment of juveniles. The majority of

juveniles had confirmed the above finding through qualitative data. Moreover,

juveniles said that there were no conflicting situations in the area before they had

committed crime. In qualitative data, all the stakeholders disconfirmed the result

except juvenile prisoners. Most of the juvenile inmates committed a crime for the first

time were not aware of the penalty/punishment. Qualitative data confirmed the above

finding. Furthermore, juveniles agreed with the statement that they were afraid of the

consequences of their criminal activity. Qualitative data collected from all

stakeholders confirmed the above finding.

When asked about recidivism, most of the juvenile inmates reported that they

had been arrested for the first time Qualitative data collected from different types of

respondents confirmed the above finding. Moreover, juveniles agreed that they had

been using drugs before their imprisonment. The majority, of juvenile respondents,

264
were opposed that the jail environment was capable of reintegration and rehabilitation

of juvenile prisoners. Qualitative data of all stakeholders confirmed the above finding

except jail staff. Most of the juveniles who were against the statement that they were

adjusted and were living happily in jail. Most of the juveniles were in favor of the

statement that imprisonment of juveniles had weakened their social bond with the

social institutions like family and peer groups. The majority, of juveniles, had refuted

that they were receiving support in the jail life for their reintegration into society. The

above finding was confirmed through qualitative data collected from different types

of respondents.

In order to gauge the effect of incongruous jail environment on the well-being

of juveniles in general and psychological well-being, in particular, different aspects

had been measured through some questions. A maximum number of the juveniles

reported that they were stressful and depressed at the jail. Qualitative data collected

from different participants confirmed the above finding. The juveniles‘ respondents

confirmed the fact that juveniles‘ independence and liberty before incarceration were

affected due to jail life. The above finding was confirmed through qualitative data of

four types of interviewees. It was reported that most of the juveniles were new to the

jail environment. The majority of the juveniles felt isolation due to being cut off from

their family and friends. Most of the juveniles were feeling guilt and shame due to

their jail life and crime. Some of the juveniles said that they had thought about

committing suicide or ever tried to commit suicide. Finally, most of the juveniles had

cried and wept at the jail when they became sad. All the agents of the justice system

confirmed and agreed with the above results.

265
 The effect of negative jail environment was measured on the sexual well-being

of juveniles to determine whether they were affected sexually due to the inappropriate

environment of jail. Most of the juveniles were affected physically in jail due to

sexual violence. Juveniles said that they had been affected emotionally in the jail.

Most of the juvenile inmates said that that there were no transgender or trans-sexual

juvenile in jail. On the other hand, most of the juveniles and jail staff through

qualitative data supported the above finding that transgender or transsexual persons

were not there in jail among juvenile prisoners. The majority of the juveniles

confirmed that they were sexually abused in the jail. Jail staff was of the view that

there were no cases of sexual abuse reported to them; juveniles blamed the jail staff.

Some of the juveniles were in the favor of the statement that they had a desire or

tendency towards sexual activities with each other. All other stakeholders except jail

staff supported this finding in the qualitative portion of the study. Jail staff argued that

there were proper checks and balances ensured for 24/7 monitoring of the activities of

juvenile inmates. In a case of the sexual tendency of adult criminals towards

juveniles, respondents were in the favor of the statement. In qualitative data only,

juvenile prisoners supported the findings of the quantitative data and the remaining

legal counsels, probation officers, and jail staff disconfirmed the results of the

quantitative data. Jail staff said that juveniles were living in separate cells and they

were not allowed to interact with adult prisoners. Furthermore, sexual tendencies of

jail staff were reported to exist with juvenile inmates. Participants in qualitative

results supported the finding. Jail staff rejected this allegation and said that juveniles

were just like their own children while probation officers and legal counsels said that

they do not know about sexual acts, but juvenile respondents told them about the

sexual tendencies of the jail staff.

266
 The effects of the incongruous environment of jail over the health of juveniles

were assessed through different statement. Most of the juvenile inmates said that there

no disabled juveniles among them. They further added that juveniles had mental

issues like tension, frustration, depression, and anxiety. Juvenile prisoners said that

there is no mental health care center at the jails and neither the jail staff provided any

type of physical activities for physical and mental freshness. The finding was

supported through qualitative data by all the stakeholders who added that there was no

mental health care in the jail. Jail staff further added that patients with mental illness

were provided with treatment by a psychiatrist outside of jail. Jail staff added that due

to limited space and no playground they were unable to provide the outdoor

recreational facilities to juvenile inmates. There was no purification plant to purify the

drinking water and no ambulance was available in ailment situation to shift the

juvenile inmates from jail to hospital. Qualitative data collected from all stakeholders

including juveniles, legal counsels and probation officers except jail staff supported

the above findings of the quantitative data that there were no purification plants and

ambulance. Jail staff said in qualitative data that fresh and clean drinking water was

provided to juveniles.

Most of the juvenile inmates confirmed that there was no formal education,

they had only religious or madrassa education at the sampled jails. Furthermore,

juveniles added that jail life hindered their formal education. Jail authority was not

provided any type of vocational training or education. In qualitative portion of the

study juvenile inmates, probation officers, legal counsels, and jail staff agreed that

formal education or vocational training was not provided to juvenile inmates at the

sampled jails. Some of the juveniles further added that when they will release from

jail they will continue their formal education like normal children.

267
5.2 Conclusion

The different elements at the sampled jails that were faced by the juvenile

prisoners and their effects on the multiple aspects were analyzed thoroughly with the

help of concurrent triangulation strategy of mixed methods research. Quantitative data

was collected from juvenile prisoners where the data was analyzed with the help of

frequencies and percentages under uni-variate analysis and a chi-square test was

applied under bi-variate analysis for the association of dependent variable and

independent variables. Qualitative data was obtained from different stakeholders

including juvenile prisoners, jail staff, probation officers and legal counsels with the

help of IDI which were analyzed through thematic analysis. The results of the

quantitative data were supported by qualitative data and the differences and

similarities in both of the data were given according to the concurrent triangulation

strategy.

While analyzing living conditions in the sampled jails of KP, it is concluded

that there were no bedding system for juvenile prisoners; they were not provided

separate mattresses and blankets. They were living in congested space because of

overcrowding at jails. Furthermore, hygienically clean water and pure food was not

provided to them. Due to rotten and germ laden food most of the juvenile prisoners

faced health problems and multiple health issues. Moreover, most of the juvenile

prisoners were not satisfied with the facilities provided in targeted jails of KP;

however, most of the juvenile prisoners agreed that the sanitation system was good

along with lighting and ventilation system for fresh air.

It is concluded from the attitude of the jail staff that they were not fair nor did

they promote the welfare of juvenile inmates. They did not provide rehabilitative and

268
correctional facilities to them, jail is considered as a place of rehabilitation but there

were unkind and humiliating practices carried out. Mostly jail staff beat juvenile

prisoners and had adverse effects on the personality of juveniles. They demanded

something as compensation and took money from juvenile prisoners when they met

with their lawyers and parents. Jail staff beat juveniles; they used slang and vulgar

language to them. Jail staff made jails an even more inappropriate place, as it disturbs

the smooth functioning of juveniles‘ lives. There were no facilities provided to

juveniles like recreational, medical and skill development opportunities, promised as

per jail reforms laid out in the JJSO 2000.

Juveniles faced problems in the justice system; they did not know about the

JJSO, 2000 which specifies the rights of juveniles. There was no proper

implementation of the ordinance which mandated the availability of free legal

assistance for the juvenile inmates, most of their parents‘ hire lawyers for their

children.

Due to the non-availability of juvenile courts, their cases were tried in the

adult courts where they were treated like adults and their cases were heard publicly,

which is in violation of the JJSO, 2000. Because of the huge number of cases in adult

courts, juvenile trials not heard in an expedient manner, leaving young offenders

physically and mentally disturbed from the lengthy and costly procedure of the courts.

It is also concluded that juveniles lived in the same jail with adult prisoners;

jail staff had no proper checks and balances over their interaction with adult criminals.

Adult gangsters were frank with them, they had strong relations with each other, they

also used cigarettes, marijuana and other drugs they made relations with adult

criminals for their protection from physical violence and financial support.

269
 Juvenile inmates who are excluded from the reformative and positive activities

may engage in negative activities. Mostly juveniles become recidivists, used drugs

and affiliated with gangs they engaged in criminal activities outside jail when they are

released. The jail environment is not capable of reintegration and rehabilitation of

juvenile prisoners, they need support outside and inside in the jail because their

imprisonment has weakened their social bond with other institutions like family,

community and other peer group.

Juveniles are depressed and stressed due to the issues they face and their

independence is affected by jail life. They face psychological problems like tension,

anxiety and frustration; they feel guilty and shameful due to their criminal

involvements. In jail most of the juveniles are affected physically, socially and

emotionally. Adult prisoners and jail staff abused juveniles sexually, they also engage

in sex with each other.

There were no health care facilities provided to juvenile inmates at jail, they

were mentally disturbed and had physical disabilities. There was no mental health

care system; most of the juveniles faced skin problems due to contaminated water,

there was no water purification system. There was no ambulance at the jail for

emergency response. Moreover, there was no formal education provided to juveniles

nor was there any type of skill development or vocational training given to them.

5.3 Recommendations
A number of recommendations are made on the basis of this study for

government, jail staff, legal counsels, probation officers, judges, and the community

in order to promote the well-being of juvenile prisoners.

270
5.3.1 Recommendations for Public Policy/Government Authority

The role of public policy in providing a better environment for juvenile

prisoners is quite obvious. In the light of this study, some recommendations are

presented. The first important recommendation is to provide educational facilities for

juvenile prisoners. Skill development programs and vocational training programs

should be provided for the juvenile prisoners. There should be medical care/treatment

facilities in jails. Along with a general physician there should be a psychologist,

psycho-therapy sessions by a psychologist and mental treatment by a psychiatrist to

ensure the psychological well-being of mentally ill juveniles. Playground and other

recreational facilities should be provided for the healthy development of juveniles.

Free legal assistance to juvenile prisoners should be provided. Government should

ensure the establishment of exclusive courts in order to ensure that juvenile cases

shall be tried in accordance to JJSO, 2000. Stress should be put on the judiciary to

expedite juvenile cases in order to prevent delays in judicial proceedings and reduce

detention of those awaiting trial. Sufficient budgets should be allocated to jails in

order to make new jails to minimize the issue of overcrowding in jails. Legislators

should raise their voice through presenting bills about those issues which are faced by

juveniles at jails and lastly but not the least, borstal institutions should be established

in the wider interest of society and particularly that of juvenile prisoners. The number

of probation officers should be increased because their skills will serve the interest of

juveniles‘ rehabilitation and reintegration. There should be a proper accountability

over the conduct of jail staff in order to prevent unjust corrupt behavior of jail staff.

The government should take positive action for the development and reformation of

juvenile inmates, so after release from jails they become the normal citizens of the

society. The government should have to increase the number of judges and probation

271
officers and to ensure that there should be free legal assistance. Most importantly,

there should be separate judges for juvenile inmates. This is the demand of the day;

that the government should establish juvenile courts and borstal institutions in every

district of the country.

5.3.2 Recommendations for Non-Governmental Organizations

Some non-governmental organizations are already working for the rights of

the children to provide them with proper education, basic health facilities and

recreational facilities. They should have to focus and provide some basic facilities for

juvenile inmates because these young people are the future of the state. They should

consider taking some positive steps for the counseling and rehabilitation of the

juvenile inmates. They should provide the basic facilities like bed, free health, books

and teacher for education and recreation. NGOs can play an important role in the

rehabilitation of the juvenile inmates.

5.3.3 Recommendations for Jail Staff

In the light of the above study, jail staff are recommended to behave

passionately and fairly with juveniles. They should teach ethics and manners to

juveniles. They should utilize the resources of jail for the betterment of juveniles.

They should ensure hygienic food and clean drinking water along with proper toilet

and washroom facilities for juvenile inmates in jail. There should be proper check and

balance over the activities and relationship of juveniles with adult prisoners. Juveniles

should be protected from sexual abuse. The availability and use of drugs should be

prevented in jails.

Access to parents, legal counsel and probation officers should be made easily

and freely to juveniles. Every measure by the jail staff should be taken to make a

272
friendly environment for the rehabilitation and reintegration of juveniles in jail. Most

importantly, the jail staff should be well trained to deal juveniles in a positive way.

5.3.4 Recommendations for Legal Counsels

As legal counsels are one of the important agents of justice system, they

should try their best for the fast and fair disposal of juvenile cases. They should

charge parents or guardian of juveniles reasonably. They should ensure the

confidentiality and privacy of juvenile prisoners. They should make the environment

of court appropriate for juveniles and should not treat them as adult prisoners. They

should raise their voice for the advocacy of juveniles‘ rights to the government and

NGOs in order to initiate new projects making people aware of different services for

juveniles like free legal assistance. Lawyers should take minimum fees from poor

juveniles.

5.3.5 Recommendations for Judges

Judges are one of the key agents of the justice system; they are supposed to

hear and dispose of juvenile cases on a priority basis. They should ensure the

protection of legal rights of juveniles. They should guarantee the privacy and

confidentiality of juveniles in the court. Judges should not treat juveniles as adult

criminals. They should grant probation services to more juveniles in order that more

juveniles may take benefit from probation services. Placing juveniles on probation

rather than in jail allows young offenders a greater chance of rehabilitation and

reintegration in the society so they will become a productive citizen of the society.

The Chief Justice of Pakistan should take so motto action on the status and

incongruous condition of the juvenile inmates at jail. Judges have to take strong action

against the investigation officers who do not submit the investigation report on time.

273
5.3.6 Recommendations for Probation Officers

Probation officers are recommended to try to give probation services to more

juveniles, as it will prevent them from experiencing an inappropriate jail environment.

Juveniles should be released on probation as soon as possible at the earliest stage from

jail because it will give them opportunity to continue their education. Probation

officers should make sure to frequently report on and visit juveniles in order that

juveniles‘ activities are properly supervised. They should meet the parents or guardian

of juveniles. They should take every measure for juveniles in order that maximum

number of juveniles can be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society.

5.3.7 Recommendations for Community

The community plays an important role in minimizing the juveniles‘ jail-

related issues. Parents are an important part of community; therefore, they should

ensure the healthy socialization and proper education of their children in an

appropriate way. They should assure check and balance over their children‘s activities

in order to prevent their involvement in criminal activities. Awareness should be

raised by the community about the legal rights and provisions to which juvenile

prisoners are entitled under JJSO, 2000. The issues that are faced by juvenile

prisoners should be raised by the community through mass media, print media,

electronic media and social media. For healthy development and reintegration of

juvenile prisoners in post incarceration life, communities should treat juvenile

prisoners as normal children to prevent them from recidivating. Parents of juveniles

should try their best to advocate for probation for their children in order to prevent

them from the negative impact of the jail environment.

274
 REFERENCES

Abiad, N., & Mansoor, F. Z. (2010). Criminal Law and the Rights of the Child in

Muslim States: A Comparative and analytical perspective. London: British

Institute of International and Comparative law.

Abrar, N., Baloch, A. G., & Ghouri, A. M. (2010). Main Attributes and Features

Effecting Juvenile Delinquents. European Journal of Social Sciences, 15(4),

530-536

Ackroyd, S. (1992). Data collection in context. Longman Group United Kingdom.

Akbar, M. S., & Bhutta, M. H. (2012). Prison Reforms and Situation of Prisons in

Pakistan. Social Sciences Review of Pakistan (SSRP), Volume 1, Issue 1

Alavi, M., & Carlson, P. (1992). A review of MIS research and disciplinary

development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 8(4), 45-62.

Aliaga, M., & Gunderson, B. (2002). Interactive statistics. Virginia. America:

Pearson Education.

Amnesty International. (2005). Pakistan: Protection of juveniles in the criminal justice

system remains inadequate, p.16. Retrieved on May 24, 2016:

http://lib.ohchr.org/HRBodies/UPR/Documents/Session2/PK/AI_PAK_UPR_

S2_2008anx_asa330212005.pdf

Andrews, D., Bonta, J., & Wormith, J. (2006). The recent past and the near future of

risk assessment. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 7-27.

Auolakh, C, A., & Khan, M. M. (2003). Pakistan prison rules: (jail manual). Lahore:

Kausar Brothers.

Austin, J., Johnson, K. D., & Gregoriou, M. (2000). Juveniles in Adult Prisons and

Jails: A National Assessment. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice

275
Australia Human Rights Score Card. (2015). Australia‘s 2015 UPR—NGO Coalition

Fact Sheet 16: Prisoners & Prison Conditions. Retrieved on May 23, 2016,

fromhttp://hrlc.org.au/wp-

content/uploads/2015/07/16+Final+Prisoners+Fact+Sheet.pdf

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014, December 11). Prisoners in Australia.

Cat. No. 4517.0. Retrieved on May 23, 2016,

fromhttp://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4517.0~

2014~Main%20Features~Overview~3

Aziz, R. and Khan, R. (2008). The State of Pakistan‘s Children 2008. SPARC

2008:34- 135) www.sparcpk.org

Babbie, E. R., & Mouton, J. (2010). The practise of Social Science

Research. Califonia: USA.

Baccaglini, W. F. (1993). Project Youth Gang-Drug Prevention: A Statewide

Research Study. Rensselaer, New York, New York State Division for Youth.

Bankston, C. L. and M. Pattillo-McCoy. (2000). Black Picket Fences: Privilege and

Peril among the Black Middle Class, JSTOR.

Baptiste, I. (2000). Calibrating the "instrument": Philosophical issues framing the

researcher's role. Class notes in ADTED 550.

Barnes, H. E., and Teeters, N. K. (1951). NEW Horizon in Criminology, 2nd ed.;

New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Beck, A. J., Adams, D. B, & Guerino, P. (2008). The prison rape elimination act of

2003: Sexual violence reported by juvenile correctional authorities, 2005-06.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved on May 29,

2016, from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svrjca0506.pdf

Bell, E., & Bryman, A. (2007). The ethics of management research: an exploratory

content analysis. British Journal of Management, 18(1), 63-77.

276
Benda, B. (2005). Gender differences in life-course theory of recidivism: A survival

analysis. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative

Criminology, 49(3), 325-342.

Bergenstrom, A., Achakzai, B., Furqan, S., Haq, M. U., Khan, R., & Saba, M. (2015).

Drug-related HIV epidemic in Pakistan: a review of current situation and

response and the way forward beyond 2015. Harm Reduction Journal, 12(43).

Retrieved on june 10 2016, from

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4608141/

Bernburg, J. G., Krohn, M. D., & Rivera, C. J. (2006). Official labeling, criminal

embeddedness, and subsequent delinquency: A longitudinal test of labeling

theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43(1), 67-88

Birckhead, T. R. (2012). Delinquent by Reason of Poverty. Washington University

Journal of Law and Policy, Vol. 38. Retrieved December 30, 2012 from

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1918331

Bishop, D. M., C. E. Frazier, L., Kaduce, L. & L. Winner. (1996). The transfer of

juveniles to criminal court: Does it make a difference? Crime and Delinquency

42(2): pp 171-191.

Bjerregaard, B., & Lizotte, A. J. (1995). Gun ownership and gang membership. The

Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 86, 37-58.

Bjørn-Andersen, N. (1985). Conference review: IS research-a doubtful science.

In Research Methods in Information Systems, Proceedings of the IFIP WG 8.2

Colloquium, September (pp. 1-3).

Block, C. R., & Block, R. (1991). Beginning with Wolfgang: An agenda for homicide

research. Journal of Crime and Justice 14, 31-70.

277
Block, R., & Block, C. R. (1993). Street Gang Crime in Chicago. Research in Brief.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Bloom, B., Owen, B., & Covington, S. (2003). Gender-responsive strategies:

Research, practice, and guiding principles for women offenders. Washington

DC: National Institute of Corrections, US Department of Justice.

Bonta, J. & Gendreau, P. (1990). Reexamining the Cruel and Unusual Punishment of

Prison Life. Law and Human Behavior 14 (4), 347-372.

Boxer, P., Middlemass, K., & Delorenzo, T. (2009). Exposure to violent crime during

incarceration: Effects on psychological adjustment following release. Criminal

Justice and Behavior, 36, 793-807, p, 4.

Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration, Cambridge University Press.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social Research Methods.4th Ed. New York: University Press Inc.

Bullis, M. (2004). "The importance of getting started right: Further examination of the

facility-to-community transition of formerly incarcerated youth." The Journal

of Special Education 38(2): 80-94.

Burgess, A. & Holmstrom, L. (1974). Rape Syndrome. American Journal of

Psychiatry, (9), 981-986.

Burke, M. C. (2013). Human Trafficking: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York:

Routledge, p. 67.

Calder, A. (Ed.). (2013). Children as victims of gangs and children as gangs in

Pakistan. Retrieved on June 8, 2016, from

https://www.academia.edu/8429488/Children_as_victims_of_gangs_and_child

ren_as_gangs_in_Pakistan

Camp, G. M., & Camp, C. G. (1985). Prison gangs: Their extent, nature, and impact

on prisons. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

278
Carrington K., & Pereira, M. (2009). Offending youth: Sex, crime and justice. Sydney,

Leichhardt: Federation Press.

Castellano, T. C. & Soderstrom, I. R. (1997). Self-Esteem, Depression, and Anxiety

Evidenced by a Prison Inmate Sample: Interrelationships and Consequences

for Prison Progamming‘. The Prison Journal 77 (3): 259- 280

Catalano, R. F., & Hawkins, J. D. (1996). The Social Development Model: A theory

of antisocial behavior. In J.D. Hawkins (Ed.), Delinquency and crime: Current

theories (pp. 149-197). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Caudill, J. W. (2009). Back on the swagger: Institutional release and recidivism

timing among gang affiliates. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 8(1), 58-70

Center for Sex Offender Management (CSOM). (2008, December). Twenty Strategies

for Advancing Sex Offender Management in Your Jurisdiction. Maryland:

Center for Effective Public Policy. Retrieve on May 29, 2016, from

http://www.csom.org/pubs/twenty_strategies.pdf

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2007, November 30). Effects on

Violence of Laws and Policies Facilitating the Transfer of Youth from the

Juvenile to the Adult Justice System: A Report on Recommendations of the

Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Morbidity and Mortality

Weekly Report, Vol. 56 / No. RR-9. Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr5609.pdf

Chaudry, S. M., & Kamal, S. (2004). Introduction to Statistical Theory II: 6th edition

(pp. 169-175), Ilmi Kitab Khana Lahore, Pakistan.

Chicago Crime Commission. (1995). Gangs: Public enemy number one, 75 years of

fighting crime in Chicagoland. Chicago: Report of the Chicago Crime

Commission.

279
Chong, C. (2013). Inmate-to-Inmate: Socialization, Relationships, and Community

Amongst Incarcerated Men. California: Legal Studies Undergraduate Honors

Seminar University of California. Retrieved

http://legalstudies.berkeley.edu/files/2013/10/Christine-Chong-Sp13.pdf

Clements, C. B. (1979). Crowded Prisons: A Review of Psychological and

Environmental Effects. Law and Human Behaviour 3 (3), 217-225

Clemmer, D. (1940). The Prison Community. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston

Cobean, S. C. & Power, P. W. (1978). ‗The Role of the Family in the Rehabilitation

of the Offender‘. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative

Criminology 22, 29-38

Cohen, B., Eden, R. & Lazar, A. (1991). The efficacy of probation versus

imprisonment in reducing recidivism of serious offenders in israel. Journal of

Criminal Justice. 19, 263-270.

Coley, R. J., & Barton, P. E. (2006). Locked Up and Locked Out: An Educational

Perspective on the U.S. Prison Population. New Jersy: Educational Testing

Service.

Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or

Punishment (Convention Against Torture). (June 18, 1986). (entered into force

June 26, 1987 and acceded to by the Philippines. Retrieved on May 30, 2016,

from https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201465/volume-

1465-I-24841-English.pdf

Cook, T. D., & Reichardt, C. S. (1979). Qualitative and quantitative methods in

evaluation.

Creswell, J. (2010). W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing

among five approaches, 2.

280
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

five designs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed

Method Approaches.4th Ed. California: Sage Publications, p.234.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed-

methods research (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cunneen, C., & Luke, G. (2011). Recidivism and the effectiveness of criminal justice

interventions: Juvenile Offenders and post release support. Current Issues in

Criminal Justice, 19(2), 197-210.

Cunningham, M. and Sorensen, J. (2007). Predictive factors for violent misconduct in

close custody. The Prison Journal. 87, 2: 241-253.

Curry, G. D., and Decker, S. H. (1998). Confronting Gangs: Crime and Community.

Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Company

Cusson, M. and Pinsonneault, P. (1986). The Decision to Give Up Crime. (Translated

by D. R. Crelinsten). Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from

http://www.popcenter.org/library/reading/PDFs/ReasoningCriminal/05_cusson

_and_pinsonneault.pdf

Davidson, F. (2016). "A critical review of mental health court liaison services in

Australia: a first national survey." Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 23(6):

908-921.

Dawley, D. (1992). A Nation of Lords: The Autobiography of the Vice Lords, 2d ed.

Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.

281
Dawn. (2012, December 18). Reforms needed in juvenile justice system. Retrieved 17

July, 2016, from http://www.dawn.com/news/772038/reforms-needed-in-

juvenile-justice-system

Dawn. (2015, September 08). KP prisons, judicial lockups overcrowded. Retrieved on

May 21, 2016, from http://www.dawn.com/news/1205651

Dawood, S. M., & Zafar, Z. (2003). Gangs of ‗New‘ Karachi. Retrieved on June 7,

2016, from http://newslinemagazine.com/magazine/gangs-of-new-karachi/

Dawson, R. O. (1990). The future of juvenile justice: Is it time to abolish the system?

Journal of CriminalLaw and Criminology 81, pp136-155

De Villiers, M. R. (2005). Interpretive research models for Informatics: action

research, grounded theory, and the family of design-and development

research. Alternation, 12(2), 10-52.

Decker, S.H., and Van, W. B. (1996). Life in the Gang: Family, Friends, and

Violence. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Decker, S.H., Bynum, T.S., & Weisel, D.L. (1998). Gangs as organized crime groups:

A tale of two cities. Justice Quarterly, 15, 395-423.

Delegran, L., Uptmor, A., Nystuen, S., & Kreitzer, M. J. (2012). Well-being white

paper. Unpublished manuscript, Center for Spirituality and Healing,

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative

research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln. (eds.). Handbook of qualitative

research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2001). The American tradition in qualitative

research (No. 301 A5).

282
Dills, C. R., & Romiszowski, A. J. (1997). The instructional development paradigm:

An introduction. In C. R. Dills, and A. J. Romiszowski (Eds)., Instructional

development paradigms. Englewood, NJ: Educational Technology

Publications, Inc.

Dilulio Jr, J. J. (1996). Stop crime where it starts. New York Times, 31.

Dunlop, S, R. (2014). Australia‘s Prison System Overcrowded to bursting point with

more than 33,000 people at jail. ABC News. Retrieved on May 23, 2016, from

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-02/austrlaian-prison-overcrowding-

female-populations-growing/5567610

Durcan, G., & Zwemstra, J. C. (2014). Mental health in prison. Prisons and Health,

World Health Organisation Europe. Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from

http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/249200/Prisons-and-

Health,-11-Mental-health-in-prison.pdf

Dye, M. H. (2010). ‗Deprivation, Importation, and Prison Suicide: Combined Effects

of Institutional Conditions and Inmate Composition‘. Journal of Criminal

Justice 38, 796- 806

Ekland-Olson, S., Kelly, W.R. & Eisenberg, M. (1992). Crime and Incarceration:

Some Comparative Findings from the 1980s. Crime & Delinquency. 38(3),

392-416.

Enggist, Stefan, Moller, L. Galea, G. & Udesen, C. (Eds.). (2014). Prisons and

Health. Copenhagen: World Health Organization. Retrieved on June 5, 2016,

from http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/249188/Prisons-

and-Health.pdf

Enzmann, D. and P. Wetzels. (2003). "Ethnic differences in juvenile delinquency: The

role of violence legitimizing norms of masculinity." Youth violence: New

patterns and local responses-Experiences in East and West: 316-345.

283
Esbensen, F., and Huizinga, D. (1993). Gangs, drugs, and delinquency in a survey of

urban youth. Criminology 31:565–589.

European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and World Health Organization

Europe. (2013). Tuberculosis surveillance and monitoring in Europe.

Retrieved on June 4, 2016, from

http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/Tuberculosis-surveillance

monitoring-2013.pdf

Evans, R., Pinnock, K., Beirens, H. and Edwards, A. (2006). Developing Preventative

Practices: The Experiences of Children, Young People and their Families in

the Children‘s Fund, Birmingham: NECF, www.ne-cf.org.

Fagan, J. (1989). The social organization of drug use and drug dealing among urban

gangs. Criminology 27:633–669.

Fagan, J. (1995). Separating the men from the boys: The comparative advantage of

juvenile versus criminal court sanctions on recidivism among adolescent

felony offenders. Sourcebook: Serious, Violent, and Chronic Juvenile

Offenders. California: Sage Publications.

Farkas, A, M. (1999). Correctional officer attitudes toward inmates and working with

inmates in a ―get tough‖ era Journal of Criminal Justice Volume 27, Issue 6,

November-December 1999, Pages 495-506

Farkas, M, A. (1995). Correctional Officer Types: Dimensions, Relationships, and

Sources. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, College of Social Science,

Michigan State University, Michigan.

Farooq, U. (2015). Overcrowding: Officials fear spread of HIV at central jail. The

Express Tribune. Retrieved on June 10, 2015,

fromhttp://tribune.com.pk/story/865511/overcrowding-officials-fear-spread-

of-hiv-at-central-jail/

284
Fayyazuddin, S., Jillani, A., & Jillani, Z. (1998). The State of Pakistan's Children,

1997. New Delhi: A.P.H. Publishing Corporation, pp. 147-148.

Fazel, S. Benning, R., & Danesh, J. (2005). Suicides in Male Prisoners in England and

Wales, 1978-2003. The Lancet 366, 1301-1302.

Fazel, S., Doll, H., & Langstrom, N. (2008). Mental disorders among adolescents in

juvenile detention and correctional facilities: a systematic review and

metaregression analysis of 25 surveys. Journal of the American Academy of

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(9), 1010–1019.

Finley, L, L. (2007). Encyclopedia of Juvenile Violence. Connecticut: Greenwood

Publishing Group, p. 144.

Fleisher, M, S. (1989). Warehousing violence. California: Sage Publications.

Fleisher, M, S. (1995). Beggars and Thieves: Lives of Urban Street Criminals.

Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press.

Fong, R, S., & Buentello, S. (1991). The detection of prison gang development: An

empirical assessment. Federal Probation, 55, 66-69.

Fong, R, S., Vogel, R.E., & Buentello, S. (1992). Prison gang dynamics: A look

inside the Texas Department of Corrections. In P.J. Benekos& A.V. Merlo

(Eds.), Corrections: Dilemmas and directions. Cincinnati: Anderson

Publicating.

Forst, M., Fagan, J., & Vivona, T. S. (1989). Youth In prisons and training schools:

Perceptions and consequences of the treatment custody dichotomy. Juvenile

and Family Court, 40(1), 1-14.

Forst, M., Fagan, J., & Vivona, T. S. (1989). Youth In Prisons and Training Schools:

Perceptions and Consequences of the Treatment Custody Dichotomy. Juvenile

and Family Court Journal, 40(1), 1-14.

285
Gaes, G., Wallace, S., Gilman, E., Klein-Saffran, J., and Suppa, S. (2002). The

influence of prison gang affiliation on violence and other prison misconduct.

The Prison Journal. 82: 359-385.

Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational Research: An

Introduction (6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Galliers, R. D. (1991). Strategic information systems planning: myths, reality and

guidelines for successful implementation. European Journal of Information

Systems, 1(1), 55-64.

Gatotoh, A, M., Omulema, B, E, E., & Nassiuma, D. (2011). Correctional Attitudes:

An Impetus for a Paradigm Shift in Inmate Rehabilitation. International

Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 1 No. 4, pp 263-270.

Gendreau, P., Little, T., and Goggin, C. (1996). A meta-analysis of the predictors of

adult offender rehabilitation: What works? Criminology 34(4): 575–608.

Glaze, L. E., & Parks, E. (2012). Correctional Populations in the United States, 2011.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved on May 29,

2016, from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus11.pdf

Glueck, S., & Glueck, E. T. (1950). Unravelling juvenile delinquency. New York:

Commonwealth Fund.

Greene, J. (2005). The generative potential of mixed methods inquiry. International

Journal of Research á Method in Education,2 8,201-2.

Guba, E. G. (Ed.). (1990). The paradigm dialog. Sage publications.

Gunderson, B. (2002). Interactive Statistics. [Thousand Oaks]: Sage.

Hagedorn, J, M. (1988). People and Folks: Gangs, Crime and the Underclass in a

Rustbelt City. Chicago, IL: Lakeview Press.

286
Haney, C. (1997). "Psychology and the Limits to Prison Pain: Confronting the

Coming Crisis in Eighth Amendment Law," Psychology, Public Policy, and

Law, 3, 499-588.

Hanson, R. K., & Morton-Bourgon, K. (2004). Predictors of sexual recidivism: An

updated meta-analysis. Ottawa: Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Canada.

Hartney, C. (2006). Fact Sheet: Youth Under Age 18 in the Adult Criminal Justice

System. California: National Council on Crime and Delinquency. Retrieved on

May 29, 2016, from

http://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdf/factsheet-youth-

in-adult-system.pdf

Hassan, S. (2014, 7, Sep). Sunday Megazine: Caged: Behind the walls of Pakistan's

prisons. Dawn, p.6.

Hawley, J., Murphy, I., & Souto-Otero, M. (2013). Prison education and training in

Europe current state-of-play and challenges: A summary report authored for

the European Commission by GHK Consulting.Retrieved on June 9, 2016,

from http://ec.europa.eu/education/library/study/2013/prison_en.pdf

Hayes, L. M. & Blauuw, E. (1997). Prison Suicide: A Special Issue.Crisis18 (4), 146-

Health, A. I. o. and Welfare. (2012). Australia's Health 2012: In Brief, AIHW.

Henslin, J. M. (2008). Social Problems: A Down-to-Earth Approach. New York:

Pearson Education, Limited.

Hilker, L. and Fraser E. (2009). "Youth Exclusion." Violence, Conflict and Fragile

States', Report prepared for DFID by Social Development Direct, London.

Hirschheim, R. (1985). Information systems epistemology: An historical

perspective. Research methods in information systems, 13-35.

287
Hochstetler, A., DeLisi, M., & Pratt, T. C. (2010). Social support and feelings of

hostility among released inmates. Crime & Delinquency, 56, 588-607.

Holtfreter, K., & Morash, M. (2003). The needs of female offenders: Implications for

correctional programming. Women & Criminal Justice, 14, 137-160.

Horowitz, R. (1983). Honor and the American Dream: Culture and Identity in a

Chicano Community. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Howell, J. C. (2003). Preventing and reducing juvenile delinquency: A comprehensive

framework, Sage.

Howell, J. C. and J. P. Lynch. (2000). Youth gangs in schools, US Department of

Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention.

Hoyle, R. H., Harris, M. J., & Judd, C. M. (2002). Research methods in social

relations. Thomson Learning.

HRCP (Human Rights Commission of Pakistan). (2011). State of human rights in

2011. Retrieved from: http://hrcp-web.org/hrcpweb/wp-content/pdf/AR2011-

A.pdf

HRCP (Human Rights Commission of Pakistan). (2014). State of human rights in

2014. Retrieved from: http://hrcp-web.org/hrcpweb/data/ar14c/2-

2%20jails%20and%20prisoners%20-%202014.pdf

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/216515.pdf

ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross). (2012 April). Water, Sanitation,

Hygiene and Habitat in Prisons: Supplementary Guidance. Retrieved on May

28, 2016 from https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-

4083.pdf

288
Ingraham, B. L., & Wellford, C. F. (1987). The totality of conditions test in eighth-

amendment litigation. In S.D. Gottfredson & S. McConville (Eds.), America‘s

correctional crisis: Prison populations and public policy. New York:

Greenwood Press.

International Crises Group. (2011). Reforming Pakistan‘s Prison System Crisis Group

Asia Report. Retrieved from:

http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/asia/south-asia/pakistan/212%20-

%20Reforming%20Pakistans%20Prison%20System.pdf

Jabeen, T. (2013). "Pakistan's Child Protection Legislative and Policy Frameworks: A

Critical Review." Pakistan Journal of Criminology 5(2): 159.

Jackson, R, K., and McBride, W. (1985). Understanding Street Gangs. Plackerville,

California: Custom Publishing.

Jacobs, J, B. (1974). Street gangs behind bars. Social Problems, 21, 395–409.

Jaine, C. (2012). There are no street children in Pakistan. Dawn. Retrieved on June 7,

2016, from http://www.dawn.com/news/707368/there-are-no-street-children-

in-pakistan

James, N. (2015). Offender Reentry: Correctional Statistics, Reintegration into the

Community, and Recidivism. Washington, DC: Congressional Research

Services Retrieved on May 29, 2016, from

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34287.pdf

Jenness, V., Maxson, C. L., Matsuda, K. N., & Sumner, J. M. (2007). Violence in

California correctional facilities: An empirical examination of sexual assault.

Center for Evidence-Based Corrections, Californaia: Department of

Criminology, Law and Society, University of California. Retrieved on May

29, 2016, from http://www.justdetention.org/pdf/VJReport2007.pdf

289
Jesuit Refugee Service. (2010, June). European Regional Office. Becoming

vulnerable in detention. PA maral (Ed.). Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from

http://www.policyinnovations.org/ideas/policy_library/data/01584/_res/id=sa_

File1/JRS-Europe_BecomingVulnerableInDetention.pdf

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed-methods research: A research

paradigm whose time has come. Educational

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Tumer, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of

mixed methods research. Journal ofMixed-methods Research, 1(1), 112-133.

Johnstone, J, W. (1983). Recruitment to a youth gang. Youth and Society 14:281–300.

Jurik, N, M., and Musheno, M. (1996). The Internal Crisis of Corrections:

Professionalization and the Work Environment. Justice quarterly 3: 457-80

Just Detention International (JDI). (2009, March). Incarcerated youth at extreme risk

of sexual abuse. Retrieved on May 29, 2016, from

http://www.prearesourcecenter.org/sites/default/files/library/94-

incarceratedyouthatextremeriskofsexualabusemarch2009_0.pdf

Kalibala, S., & Elson, L. (2010). Situation analysis of vulnerable children in Uganda

2009. New York: Population Council.

Karnam, M. (2007-08). Conditions of Detention in the Prisons of Karnataka. M

Daruwala & P. Pascal. (Eds.). New Delhi: Commonwealth Human Rights

Initiative (CHRI). Retrieved on May 28, 2016, from

http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/prisons/conditions_of_dete

ntion_in_the_prisons_of_karnataka.pdfb

Kazmi, K., Ameen, A., Ameen, K., Daroowala, M., Butt, O. W., Jaffar, S. R., &

Lakdawala, T. A. (2013). Research Methods in Social Sciences:

Understanding Juvenile Recidivism in karachi. (Doctoral dissertation, IBA

290
 (Institute of Business and Administration). Karachi: IBA. Retrieved on May

23, 2016, from http://pp.lao.org.pk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/IBA-

Understanding-Juvenile-recidivism-in-Karachi-Final-Report.pdf

Keiser, R. L. (1969). The Vice Lords: Warriors of the Street. New York, NY: Holt,

Rinehart and Winston.

Kelk, C. (1999). "Recommendation No. R (98) 7 of the Committee of Ministers to

Member States concerning the Ethical and Organisational Aspects of Health

Care in Prison." European journal of health law 6(3): 265-278.

Klein, M. W. (1995). The American Street Gang. New York: Oxford University Press

Kolind, T., Frank, V. A., & Dahl, H. (2010). Drug treatment or alleviating the

negative consequences of imprisonment? A critical view of prison-based drug

treatment in Denmark Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages 43-48 (January 2010).

Kosterman, R., Hawkins, J. D., Hill, K. G., Abbott, R. D., Catalano, R. F., and Guo, J.

(1996). The developmental dynamics of gang initiation: When and why young

people join gangs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American

Society of Criminology, Chicago, IL.

Kothari, C. R. (2004). Research methodology: Methods and techniques. New Age

International.

Kramer, J. H., and Steffensmeier, D. J. (1977). The differential detention/jailing of

juveniles: A Comparison of Detention and Non-Detention Courts. Pepp. L.

Rev., 5(3):795-807.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2009). Methods of educational and social science research. Long

Grove, IL:'Waveland Press.

Krauss, S. E. (2005). Research paradigms and meaning making: A primer. The

Qualitative Report, ¡0(4), 758-770.

291
Krejcie, R. V. and Morgan, D. W. (1970). ―Determining sample size for research

activities.‖ Educational and psychological measurement30(3): 607-610.

Krishnan, J. K. & Kumar, C. R. (2011). Delay in process, denial of justice: the

jurisprudence and empirics of speedy trials in comparative perspective.

Retrived on May 22, 2016, from

http://www.jgu.edu.in/sites/default/files/JayanthKrishnanandCRajKumar16Se

p2011.pdf

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions, 31-65.

Kumar, R. (2011). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners. (3rd

Ed). California: Sage Publications Inc, p. 145.

Kupers, T. (1999). Prison Madness: The Mental Health Crisis behind bars and what

we should do about it. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Land, K.C., McCall, P. L. Williams, J. R., & Ezell, M. (1998). Alternatives to

Detention Study: Final Report, Administrative Office of the Courts,

Juvenile Services Division. North Carolina: Administrative Office of the

Courts.

Lane, M. P. (1989). "Inmate gangs." Corrections Today 51(4): 98-99.

Lariviere, M. (2001). Antecedents and outcomes of correctional officer attitudes

towards federal inmates: An exploration of person –Organization fit.

(Unpublished doctorial thesis). Ottawa: Carleton University.

Larsen, D., Flesaker, K., & Stege, R. (2008). Qualitative interviewing using

interpersonal process recall: Investigating internal experiences during

professional-client conversations. International Journal of Qualitative

Methods, 7(1), 18-37.

292
Leedy, P. D. (1993). Practical research: planning and design. New Jersey: Prentice-

Hall.

Lerman, P. (1977). Discussion of differential selection of juveniles for detention.

Journal of Researchin Crime and Delinquency 14(2):166-172.

Levenson, J. S., & Cotter, L. P. (2005). The effect of Megan‘s Law on sex offender

reintegration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 21(1), 49-66.

Levin, M. (1991). The reification-realism-positivism controversy in macromarketing:

A philosopher's view. Journal of Macromarketing, 11(1), 57-65.

Levitt, S. D. (1998). Juvenile crime and punishment. Journal of Political Economy

106(6), 1156-1185.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E., G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and

emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of

Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications, Inc.

Lipton, D., Martinson, R., and Wilks, J. (1975). The Effectiveness of Correctional

Treatment: A Survey of Treatment Evaluation Strategies. New York: Praeger.

Lizotte, A. J., Tesoriero, J. M., Thornberry, T. P., and Krohn, M. D. (1994). Patterns

of adolescent firearms ownership and use. Justice Quarterly 11:51–73.

Lou, C., Anthony, E. K., Stone, S., Vu, C.M., & Austin, M. J. (2008). Assessing child

and youth well-being: Implications for child welfare practice. Journal of

Evidence-Based Social

Mack, N., Woodsong, C., MacQueen, K. M., Guest, G., & Namey, E. (2005).

Research methods: A data collector's field guide. North Carolina: Family

Health International.

293
MacKenzie, D. L., & Goldstein, L. (1985). Long-Term Incarceration Impacts and

Characteristics of Long-Term Offenders: An Empirical Analysis. Criminal

Justice and Behavior 12 (4), 395-414

Maertens, F. and C. Anstey. (2007). "Crime, violence, and development: Trends,

costs, and policy options in the Caribbean." Caribbean: The United Nations

Office on Drugs and Crime Latin America and the Caribbean Region of the

World Bank.

Malik, M, A & Shirazi, R, A. (2010). An Analytical Review of Juvenile Delinquents

At jails Of Sindh Province: Some Problems And Suggestions to Over Come.

Indus Journal of Management & Social Sciences, 4(1):43-54

Maltz, M. D. (2001). Recidivism. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.Retrieved on

June 5, 2016, from

https://www.uic.edu/depts/lib/forr/pdf/crimjust/recidivism.pdf

Manco, E. (2015). Detention of the Child in the Light of International Law-A

Commentary on Article 37 of the united nation Convention on the Rights of

the Child. Amsterdam LF, 7, p.55.

Markov, D., & Doichinova, M. (2015). Prison conditions monitoring index

methodology and pilot results. Retrieved on May 29, 2016, from

http://www.ub.edu/ospdh/sites/default/files/documents/PCMI.%20Methodolog

y%20and%20pilot%20results.pdf

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). The ―what‖ of the study: Building the

conceptual framework. Designing qualitative research, 3, 21-54.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). The ―what‖ of the study: Building the

conceptual framework. Designing qualitative research, 3, 21-54.

294
Martyniuk, H. (2014). Understanding Rape in Prison. Pennsylvania coalition against

rape. Retrieved on May 29, 2016, from http://www.ccasa.org/wp-

content/uploads/2014/12/prea_understanding_rape_in_prison.pdf

Masten, A., and Garmezy, N., Risk. (1985). Vulnerability and Protective Factors in

Developmental Psychopathology. F. Lahey& A Kazdin (Eds.). New York:

Plenum

Maxcy, S. J. (2003). Pragmatic threads in mixed-methods research in the social

sciences: The search of multiple modes of inquiry and the end of the

philosophy of formalism. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of

mixedmethods in social and behavioral research (pp. 51-89). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

McAlinden, A. M. (2006). Managing risk: from regulation to the reintegration of

sexual offenders. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 6, 197-218

MCcall, P. and Robert, B. (1975). Fundamental statistic for psychology 2nd edition.

Harcourt brace Jovanovich, Inc, (New York, USA).

McCurley, C. and H. N. Snyder (2004). Victims of violent juvenile crime, US

Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention.

McNulty, T. L. and Huey, M. P. (2005). ‘Institutional Conditions and Prison Suicide:

Conditional Effects of Deprivation and Overcrowding‘. The Prison Journal 85

(4): 490- 514, p. 4.

McShane, M., Williams, P., & Dolney. H. (2002). Do standard risk prediction

instruments apply to female parolees? Women & Criminal Justice, 13, 163-

182.

295
Melvin, K. B., Gramling L. K. & Gardner W. M. (1985). A scale to measure attitudes

toward prisoners. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 12, 241-253.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded

sourcebook. sage.

Miller, W. B. (1958). Lower class culture as a generating milieu of gang delinquency.

Journal of Social Issues 14:5–19.

Miller, W. B. (1974). American youth gangs: Past and present. In Current

Perspectives on Criminal Behavior, edited by A. Blumberg. New York, NY:

Knopf.

Miller, W. B. (1992) (Revised from 1982). Crime by Youth Gangs and Groups in the

United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Ministry of Justice, England. (2015, January 29). Youth Justice Statistics 2013/14

England and Wales. Retrieve on June 16, 2016, from

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

399379/youth-justice-annual-stats-13-14.pdf

Moon, B., & Maxwell, S. R. (2004). The sources and consequences of corrections

officers' stress: A South Korean example. Journal of Criminal Justice, 32(4),

359-370.

Moore, J. M. (2010). Juvenile detention in Uganda: Review of Ugandan remand

homes and the national rehabilitation centre. Retrieved on, May 29, 2016,

from https://www.crin.org/en/docs/Juvenile%20_detention_Uganda.pdf

Moore, J. W. (1978). Homeboys: Gangs, Drugs and Prison in the Barrios of Los

Angeles. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Moore, J.W. (1988). Introduction: Gangs and the underclass: A comparative

perspective. In People and Folks, by J. Hagedorn. Chicago, IL: Lake View.

296
Moore, J.W. (1991). Going Down to the Barrio: Homeboys and Homegirls in Change.

Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Moore, J.W., Vigil D., and Garcia, R. (1983). Residence and territoriality in Chicano

gangs. Social Problems 31:182–194.

Moore, M.H., & S. Wakeling. (1997). Juvenile justice: Shoring up the foundations.

Crime and Justice, Vol.22, M. Tonry, ed. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press, pp 253-301

Morrison, K. R. B. (1993). Planning and Accomplishing School-Centred Evaluation.

Dereham, UK: Peter Francis.

Mumola, C. J. (2005). Suicide and homicide in State Prisons and Local Jails.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,

Bureau of Justice Statistics. Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/shsplj.pdf

Munir, M. A. (2007). Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 - Theory. Pakistan

Law Journal, 52. Retrieved December 30, 2012 from

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1955258

Murray, C. (2009). Typologies of young resisters and desisters. Youth Justice 9(2),

115–129

Myers, M. D. (1997). Qualitative research in information systems. Manage Inform

Sys Q, 21, 241–242.

Nadeem, H. A. (2002). Pakistan: The political economy of lawlessness. Karachi,

Sindh: Oxford University Press.

National Institute of Justice. (2014, February). Justice Research: delays in youth

justice. Washington DC: US Department of Jusitce. Retrieved on May 22,

2016, from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/237149.pdf

297
National Prison Rape Elimination Commission Report. (2009, June). Unequal Risk:

Vulnerability and Victimization. Retrieved on May 29, 2016, from

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/226680.pdf

National Research Council. (2001). Juvenile Crime, Juvenile Justice: The Juvenile

Justice System. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.

National Youth Gang Center. (1997). 1995 National Youth Gang Survey. Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Nembrini, P. G. (2013). Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Habitat in Prisons.Genava:

ICRC. Retrieved on May 28, 201,

fromhttps://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc-002-0823.pdf

Neuman, W. L. (2013). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative

approaches. Pearson education.

New South Wales Law Reform Commission. (2012). Bail, Report No 133 xvii.

Retrieved on May 24, 2016, from

http://www.lawreform.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/lrc/documents/pdf/r1

33.pdf

Newton, G. D., & Zimring, F. E. (1969). Firearms and Violence in American Life: A

Staff Report to the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of

Violence.

Noor, F., &Lodhi, F. A. (2014). Causes of Crimes in Educated Youth of Sindh: A

Survey Study. Asian Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, Vol. 3(2), pp.

165-173. Retrieved March 1, 2016, from http://www.ajssh.leena-

luna.co.jp/AJSSHPDFs/Vol.3(2)/AJSSH2014(3.2-20).pdf

Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

298
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

(1989, November 20). Convention on the Rights of the Child. Retrieved on

June 9, 2016, from

http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/crc.pdf

Ombudsman, V. (2014). Investigation into the rehabilitation and reintegration of

prisoners in Victoria. Retrieved on May 23, 2016, from

https://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/getattachment/280f4a06-5927-4221-bf64-

d884ba6abaf9//publications/discussion-papers/discussion-paper-investigation-

into-the-rehabilita.aspx

Open Society Foundation. (2011, June). Pretrial Detention and Torture: Why Pretrial

Detainees Face the Greatest Risk. Retrieved on May 24, 2016, from

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/pretrial-detention-

and-torture-06222011.pdf

Orlando-Morningstar, D. (1997, October). Prison gangs. Special Needs Offender

Bulletin, 2, 13.

Orsagh, T., & Chen, J. R. (1988). The effect of time served on recidivism: An

interdisciplinary theory. Journal of Quantitative Criminology. 4(2), 155-171.

Paboojian, A., & Teske, R. H. (1997). Pre-service Correctional Officers: What do

they think about treatment? Journal of criminal Justice, Vol.25, No.5,pp 425-

433.

Parekh, V. (1999). Prison bound: the denial of juvenile justice in Pakistan, Human

Rights Watch.

Patterson, G. R., Dishion, T. J., & Yoerger, K. (2000). Adolescent growth in new

forms of problem behaviour: Macro- and micro-peer dynamics. Prevention

Science 1(1), 3-13.

299
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods ( 2nd ed.).

Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Pawlak, E. J. (1977). Differential selection of juveniles for detention. Journal of

Research in Crime and Delinquency 14(2):152-165.

PDLAOA (PUBLIC DEFENDER AND LEGAL AID OFFICE ORDINANCE).

(2009). Retrieved on May 22, 2016, from

http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/asia/south-asia/pakistan/227-aid-

and-conflict-in-pakistan.pdf

Penal Reforms International. (2015). Global prison trends. Retrieved on May 29,

2016, from http://www.penalreform.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/PRI-

Prisons-global-trends-report-LR.pdf

Peters, R. H. (2015). "Co-occurring substance use and mental disorders in the

criminal justice system: A new frontier of clinical practice and research."

Petersilia, J. (1997). Probation in the United States: Practices and challenges. National

Institute of Justice Journal September.

Phelps, S. (2002.). World of criminal justice. Farmington Hills, Michigan: Gale Group

Pinkerton, S. D., Galletly, C. L., & Seal, D. W. (2007). Model-based estimates of HIV

acquisition due to prison rape. The Prison Journal, 87, 295-310. Retrieved on

May 29, 2016, from http://www.sidastudi.org/resources/inmagic-

img/dd7454.pdf

Platt, A. (1977). The Child Savers: The Invention of Delinquency. (2nded). Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Podkopacz, M. R. & Feld, B. C. (1996). The end of the line: An empirical study of

judicial waiver. Journal of Criminal Lawand Criminology 86(2):449-492.

300
Poole, E., and Regoli, R. (1980). Role Stress, Custody Orientation and Disciplinary

Actions: A Study of Prison Guards. Criminology 18:215-26

Powelson, M., & Fletcher, J. F. (2000). Sexually transmitted diseases, drug use, &

risky behavior among Miami-Dade county jail detainees. Corrections Today,

62(16): 108.

Prakash, O., Sharma, N., Singh, A. R., & Sanger, K. S. (2015). Effect of incarceration

on well being of prisoners: A study among convicted and under trials. The

International Journal of Indian Psychology, 3(1), 5, 155-164, P. 21.

Ralph, P. & Marquart, J. (1991). Gang violence in Texas prisons. The Prison Journal,

71, 38-49.

Ralph, P., Hunter, R. J., Marquart, J. W., Cuvelier, S. J., & Merianos, D. (1996).

Exploring the differences between gang and non-gang prisoners: In gangs in

America. (2nd ed.). C. R. Huff (Ed.). California: Sage Publications.

Ramzan, S. (2014). Juvenile Justice System Ordinance is in books only. Pakistan

Today. Retrieved on May 17, 2016, from

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/07/19/national/juvenile-justice-

system-ordinance-is-in-books-only/

Rehman, M. (2011). Backlog of over 1.35m cases ‗haunts‘ the judiciary. Retrieved on

May 22, 2016, from

http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2011/08/08/national/backlog-of-over-1-

35m-cases-%E2%80%98haunts%E2%80%99-the-judiciary/

Remenyi, D., & Williams, B. (1996). The nature of research: qualitative or

quantitative, narrative or paradigmatic?. Information Systems Journal, 6(2),

131-146.Researcher, 33(1), 14-26.

301
Richards, H. M., & Schwartz, L. J. (2002). Ethics of qualitative research: are there

special issues for health services research?. Family Practice, 19(2), 135-139.

Richards, K. (2011). Trends in Juvenile Detention in Australia. Trends and Issues in

Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 416. Retrieved on May 23, 2016,

fromhttp://www.aic.gov.au/media_library/publications/tandi_pdf/tandi416.pdf

Rodriguez, S. A. (2007). "The Impotence of Being Earnest: Status of the United

Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners in Europe

and the United States." New Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 33: 61.

Rosenheim, M. K. (1983). Juvenile justice: Organization and process. Encyclopedia

of Crime and Justice, Vol. 3. S. Kadish, ed. New York: Free Press, 969-977

Rubin, H. J. & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative interview: The art of hearing data (3rd

ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data.

Sage.

Rust, B. (1999). Juvenile jailhouse rocked: Reforming detention in Chicago,

Portland, and Sacramento. Baltimore: Annie E. Casey Foundation.

Rutigliano, L. W. (2008). Covering the unknown city: citizen journalism and

marginalized communities, ProQuest.

Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning

points through life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (2005). A life-course view of the development of crime.

The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 602 (1),

12-45.

Samuels, B. H. (2011). Addressing trauma to promote social and emotional well-

being: A child welfare imperative. Child Welfare, 90(6), 19–28.

302
Sana, S. (2007). Pakistan a Call for prison Reforms. Retrieved on 1 May 2016, from

www.sanasaleem.com/2010/04/07/Pakistan-a-call for prison reforms/

Sanchez-Jankowski, M.S. (1991). Islands in the Street: Gangs and American Urban

Society. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Sandelowski, M. (2000). Combining qualitative and quantitative sampling, data

collection, and analysis techniques in mixed‐ method studies. Research in

nursing & health, 23(3), 246-255.

Sapsford, R. J. (1978). Life-sentence prisoners: Psychological changes during

sentence. The British Journal of Criminology, 128-145.

Sapsford, R., & Jupp, V. (Eds.). (2006). Data collection and analysis. Sage.

Schlossman, S. (1977). Love and the American Delinquent: The Theory and Practice

of ―Progressive‖ Juvenile Justice, 1825-1920. Illionis: University of Chicago

Press.

Schlossman, S. (1983). Juvenile justice: History and philosophy. Encyclopedia of

Crime andJustice, Vol. 3, S. Kadish, ed. New York: Free Press. Pp. 961-969

Schonteich, M. (2014). Presumption of Guilt The Global Overuse of Pretrial

Detention. New York: Open Society Foundations.

Scott, E. S. & Steinberg, L. (2008). Rethinking Juvenile Justice. Massachusetts:

Harvard University Press.

Sheley, J. F., and Wright, J. D. (1995). In the Line of Fire: Youth, Guns and Violence

in Urban America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine De Gruyter.

Short, J. F., Jr., and Strodtbeck, F. L. (1965). Group Process and Gang Delinquency.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.

Shri, R. (2007). Well-being and alternative therapies. In R. Singh, & R. Shyam (Eds.),

Psychology of well-being (pp. 381-389). New Delhi: Global Vision Publishing

House, p. 7.

303
Sickmund, M. and C. Puzzanchera. (2014). "Juvenile offenders and victims: 2014

national report."

Sigamony, T. (2011). NJPMC takes exception to faulty investigations. The Nations.

Retrieved on May 22, 2016, from http://nation.com.pk/national/16-May-

2011/NJPMC-takes-exception-to-faulty-investigations

Silva, W. (1994). A brief history of prison higher education in the United States. M.

Williford (ed.). Higher Education in Prison: A Contradiction in Terms?

Arizona: Oryx Press.

Silver, H. (2007). "The process of social exclusion: the dynamics of an evolving

concept."

Singh, R., & Shyam, R. (2007). Psychology of well-being. New Delhi; Global Vision

Publishing House.

Singleton, N., Meltzer, H., & Gatward, R. (1998). Psychiatric morbidity among

prisoners in England and Wales. London: Office for National Statistics.

Skarbek, D. (2014). The social order of the underworld: How prison gangs govern the

American penal system. Oxford University Press.

Smith, B. (1998). Children in custody: 20-year trends in juvenile detention,

correctional, and shelter facilities. Crime and Delinquency 44(4):526 543.

Smith, P., & Ragan, T. J. (1999). Instructional Design. 2nd ed. John, Wiley & Sons,

Inc.

Smith, R. K. (2013). Text and materials on international human rights. Routledge-

Cavendish, p.368.

Soler, M. I. (1997). Remarks before the Senate Youth Violence Subcommittee. Senate

Judiciary Committee, on the core requirement's of the Juvenile Justice Act and

the" Violent Juvenile and Repeat Offender Act of.

304
SPARC. (2000). The juvenile justice system ordinance, 2000 (XXII of 2000).

Retrieved on May 20, 2016, from

http://sparcpk.org/pdf/Juvenile%20Justice%20System%20Ordinance%202000

.pdf

SPARC. (2006). The State of Pakistan‘s Children. Islamabad: SPARC.

SPARC. (2010). The State of Pakistan‘s Children. Islamabad: SPARC.

SPARC. (2011). The State of Pakistan‘s Children. Islamabad: SPARC.

SPARC. (2015). Statistics of Prisoners in the Prisons of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

Islamabad: Society for the Protection of the Rights of the Child.

Spergel, I. A. (1995). The Youth Gang Problem. New York, NY: Oxford University

Press.

Stahl, A. L., Sickmund, M. Finnegan, T. A., Snyder, H. N., Poole, R. S., and Tierney,

N. (1999). Juvenile Court Statistics, 1996. Washington D.C: Office of

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Diane Publishing Company.

Stastny, C., & Tyrnauer, G. (1983). Who rules the joint? The changing political

culture of maximum-security prisons in America. New York: Lexington

Books.

Steinberg, L. (1987). Single parents, stepparents, and the susceptibility of adolescents

to antisocial peer pressure. Child Development, 58(1), 269-75.

Sykes, G. M. (1958). The pains of imprisonment. G. M. Sykes (Ed.). New Jersy:

Princeton University Press.

Tanoli, I. (2014). Ambiguity over ATCs‘ power to try minors intrigues lawyers.

Retrieved on June 16, 2016, from http://www.dawn.com/news/1146453

Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). The new era of mixed methods.

305
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. B. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and

behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Taylor, C.S. (1989). Dangerous Society. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University

Press.

Taylor, C.S. (1990). Gang imperialism. In Gangs in America. C.R. Huff (Ed.).

California: Sage Publications.

Teddlie, C, & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research:

Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and

behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controveries in the use of

mixed methods in the social and behvioral sciences. Handbook of mixed

methods in social & behavioral research, 3-50.

The European Prison Rules (EPR). (2006). Stipulate that the accommodation

provided to prisoners, and in particular allsleeping accommodation, must

respect human dignity and, as far as possible,privacy of inmates.

Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the

European Prison Rules, Retrieved on May 28, 2016, from

https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=955747.

The Express Tribune. (2011, August 26). Age of innocence: Police have a hand in

abuse, say Karachi‘s street child sex workers. Retrieved on June 8, 2016,

from http://tribune.com.pk/story/239874/children-sexually-abused-on-

streets/

The Express Tribune. (2016, April 16). Province‘s prisons: Nearly twice as many

inmates than sanctioned space. Retrieved May 21, 2016, from

http://tribune.com.pk/story/1085685/provinces-prisons-nearly-twice-as-many-

inmates-than-sanctioned-space/

306
The Prison Rape Elimination Act of. (2003). Weekly compilation of presidential

documents, 39. Retrieved on May 29, 2016, from

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ79/pdf/PLAW-108publ79.pdf

The united nation Children‘s Fund (UNICEF). (2006). Justice in South Asia:

Improving Protection for Children in Conflict with the Law. Kathmandu:

UNICEF

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNDOC). (2012, November 7).

Response of the Government of the Republic of Italy to Note CU 2011/26.

Open-Ended Intergovernmental Group of Experts on the Standard Minimum

Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners Buenos Aires, Argentina, 11-13

December 2012. Retrieved on May 24, 2016, from

http://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/EGM-

Uploads/ITALY-GOV-20-En.pdf

The United Nations. (1986). The United Nations standard minimum rules for the

administration of juvenile justice. New York: The United Nations, Department

of Public Information. Retrieved May 21, 2016, from

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/145271NCJRS.pdf

The United Nations. (December 10, 1984). Convention against Torture and Other

Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Retrieved May 21,

2016, from http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cat.pdf

Thielbar, K. (2011). Education in Juvenile Detention Centers. Retrieved on May 28,

2016, from

http://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/centers/childlaw/childed/pdfs/2011stude

ntpapers/thielbar_juvenile_detention.pdf

307
Thornberry, T. P. (1998). Membership in youth gangs and involvement in serious and

violent offending. In Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders, edited by R.

Loeber and D.P. Farrington. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Thrasher, F. M. (1927). The Gang. Illionis: University of Chicago Press.

Toch, H. (1977). Living in Prison: The Ecology of Survival. New York: Free Press.

Torbet, P., Gable, R., Montgomery, I., & Hurst, H. (1996). State Responses to Serious

and Violent Juvenile Crime. Washington DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, U.S. Department of Justice.

Towl, G. J. (2003). Suicide in Prisons: Reflections on Research and Practice‘. The

Prison Progamming. The Prison Journal 77 (3), 259-280. Justice and

Behavior 26 (2), 235-250.

Trulson, C., Marquart, J. W., Mullings, J. L., & Caeti, T. (2005). In between

adolescence and adulthood. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3(4), 355-

387.

Twomey, K. (2008). The Right to Education in Juvenile Detention Under State

Constitutions. Virginal Law Review, Vol. 94, 765-811.

U.N. Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, Rule 49. (1990,

December 14). General Assembly: 68th plenary meeting. Retrieved on June 5,

2016, from http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/45/a45r113.htm

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, &

Youth Families. (2012, April 17). Promoting social and emotional well-being

for children and youth receiving child welfare services. Children's Bureau

Information Memorandum Log No: ACYF-CB-IM-12-04 (Retrieved from

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/policy/im/2012/im1204.pd

f).

308
U.S. Department of Justice. (2013, February). Addressing sexual violence against

youth in custody. Washington, DC: National Institute of Correction. Retrieved

on May 29, 2016, from http://static.nicic.gov/Library/026309.pdf

U.S. Department of State. (2013). Report on International Prison Conditions.

Retrieved on May 24, 2016, from

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/210160.pdf

Uebersax, J. S. (2006). Likert scales: dispelling the confusion. Statistical Methods for

Rater Agreement website.

UN. (2005). Special Report on World Prison Condition, GAOR Supp. No. 49A at200,

U.N. Doc A/45/49.

UNICEF. (2006). Juvenile Justice in South Asia: Improving Protection for Children in

Conflict with the Law, The United Nations Children's Fund, Regional Office

for South Asia. http://www. unicef. org/rosa/Juvenile_Justice_ in_South_Asia.

pdf (accessed 7 August 2008).

UNODC. (2012, November 7). Prisons and HIV. Retrieved on June 4, 2016, from

https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/hiv-aids/new/prison_settings_HIV.html

US Justice Rule. (2012). United States Department of Justice Final Rule, National

Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape, Under the Prison

Rape Elimination Act (PREA), 28 C.F.R. Part 115, Docket No. OAG-131,

RIN 1105, pp. 33-44.

Valdez, A. (1997). A contemporary assessment of Mexican American youth gangs in

South Texas. Unpublished paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the

American Society of Criminology, San Diego, CA.

Vigil, J. D. (1988). Barrio Gangs: Street Life and Identity in Southern California.

Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

309
Vigil, J. D., and Long, J. M. (1990). Emic and etic perspectives on gang culture. In

Gangs in America, edited by C.R. Huff. Newbury Park CA: Sage Publications.

Visher, C. A. and J. Travis. (2003). "Transitions from prison to community:

Understanding individual pathways." Annual review of sociology 29(1): 89-

113.

Walker, N., Farrington D. P. and Tucker, G. (1981). Reconviction Rates of Adult

Males After Different Sentences. British Journal of Criminology. 21(4), 357-

360.

Walmsley, R. (2015). World Prison Population List. 11th Ed. London: Institute for

Criminal Policy Research

Watson, L. and Edelman P. (2012). "Improving the juvenile justice system for girls:

Lessons from the states." Geo. J. on Poverty L. &Pol'y 20: 215.

Wheeler, G. R. & Hissong, R. V. (1988). A survival time analysis of criminal

sanctions for misdemeanor offenders: A case for alternatives to incarceration.

Evaluation Review. 12(5), 510-527.

Wheeler, S. (1961). Socialization in Correctional Communities. American

Sociological Review, 26, 697-712.

Widom, R., & Hammett, T. M. (1996). HIV/AIDS and STDs in juvenile facilities.

National Institute of Justice Research in Brief. Washington, DC: United States

Department of Justice.

Wilkinson, D. L., & Fagan, J. (1996). The role of firearms and violence ―scripts‖: The

dynamics of gun events among adolescent males. Law and Contemporary

Problems, 59(1), 55-89.

Wilson, W. J. (1987). The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and

Public Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.

310
Winterdyk, J. A. (2005). Juvenile Justice in the International era. Reichel P. (Ed.).

Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice. Thousand Oaks: Sage

Publications

Wooldredge, J. D. (1999). Inmate Experiences and Psychological Well-Being.

Criminal Justice and Behavior 26 (2), 235-250

Wordes, M., and Jones, S. M. (1998). Trends in juvenile detention and steps toward

reform. Crime and Delinquency 44(4):544-560.

Work, 5(1–2), 91–133.

World Prison Brief. (2015). Highest to Lowest - Prison Population Total. Retrieved

on 13 May 2016, from:http://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison-

population-total? field_region_taxonomy_tid=All

Wright, K. N. (1993). Prison environment and behavioral outcomes. Journal of

Offender Rehabilitation, 20, 93-113.

Yell, M. L. (1998). "The legal history of special education: What a long, strange trip

it's been!" Journal for Special Educators 19(4): 219-228.

Yvonne Feilzer, M. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically:

Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research

paradigm. Journal of mixed methods research, 4(1), 6-16.

Zamble, E., & Porporino, F. (1990). Coping, imprisonment, and rehabilitation: Some

data and their implications. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 17, 53-70.

Ziauddin, U. (2015). Habitual criminals invariably turn into professionals after

spending time in Pakistani prisons. Retrieved on June 5, 2016, from

http://nation.com.pk/blogs/28-Oct-2015/habitual-criminals-invariably-turn-

into-professionals-after-spending-time-in-pakistani-prisons.

Ziedenberg, J., & Schiraldi, V. (1998). Risks juveniles face when incarcerated with

adults. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 7(2), 83.

311
Annexure-I

INTERVIEW SCHEDULEFOR JUVENILE PRISONERS

I Respondent’s Bio Data

1. Respondent No. ………………………………….

2. Name ………………………………….
3. Age (years) a. Less than 11 b. 12-15 c. 16-18
4. Education a. Not enrolled b. Nursery-Grade 6 c. Grade 7-Grade 12
5. Residence in a. Urban b. Rural
6. Family type a. Nuclear b. Joint c. Extended
7. Status of Parents a. Father Alive b. Mother Alive c. Both Alive
d. Both Deceased
8. Family Atmosphere of Respondents

a. Parents not alive b. Pleasant c. Unpleasant

9. Fathers‘ Occupation, if alive

a. Govt Service b. Private Service c. Agriculture
d. Business

10. Mothers‘ Occupation, If alive

a. House Wife b.Govt Service c. Private Service

d. Agriculture e. Business

11. Fathers‘ Education a. Illiterate b. Up to matric c. Above matric

12. Mothers‘ Education a. Illiterate b. Up to matric c. Above matric

13. Family Size a. Less than 3 b. 4-10 c. Above 10

14. Family‘s Monthly Income from all Resources
a. Less than 10000 b. 10000-30000 Above 30000

314
II Information about nature of crime and Punishment

1. In which crime are you experiencing jail life?

a. Murder b. Dacoity c. Robbery
d. Sexual Abuse d. Valuables Snatching

e. Quarrel with Parents f. Assault on Someone g. Drugs

2. Status of the Juveniles‘ Suits
a. Decided by the court b. Still under hearing at court c.Yet go to Court
3. Duration of Punishment Awarded to Juveniles
a. Less than one year b. Up to one year c. Up to five years
d. Above 5 years e. Life Imprisonment
4. Time Span/Length of Juveniles Cases/Trials
a. Upto 1 month b. 2-4 months c. 5-8 months d. 9-12 months e. above 01 year
5. Duration of Staying at Jails
a. Less than one year b. One year c. Up to five years
d. Above 5 years

315
III Information based on Variables of the Study:

i. Living Condition Confronting Juvenile Prisoners in Jail

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles have separate bed at jail
2
Juveniles live in a congested space
3
Mattresses and blankets etc. are provided at the jail
4
Clean drinking water is available at jail
5
There is enough water at the jail for the cleaning
purposes
6
Juveniles are satisfied with the toilet facility at the
jail
7
Juveniles are satisfied with the food provided at the
jail
8
Sanitation arrangement is satisfactory at jail
9
They were exposed to different diseases due to
unhygienic and even lack of food.
10
Windows are there at jail

316
ii. Attitude of Jail Staff towards Juvenile Inmates

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Jail staff deals fairly with juveniles
2
Jail staff is promoting the welfare of juveniles
3
Rehabilitative and correctional facilities are
available at jail for juveniles
4
Cruel/humiliating practices are carried out at the jail
5
Penalty at jail has negative effects on juveniles
6
Unhealthy behavior of staff promotes criminal
tendencies at jail
7
Jail staff demands different forms of compensation
when juveniles need something
8
Juveniles have easy access to legal counsel,
probation officers and parents
9
Jail staff teaches ethics/manners to juveniles

317
iii. Exclusive Prisons (Borstal Institutions)

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles are beaten at jail
2
Juveniles are fearful of the jail staff
3
Juveniles are prey to ill manners of jail staff like
shouting, bullying and beating
4
Overcrowding at jail increases disharmony among
juveniles
5
Recreational services are available to juveniles at jail
6
Jail life disturbs the smooth functioning of juveniles‘
lives
7
Medical services are there at jail
8
Skill development programs are there for juveniles
9
Juveniles sleep and live a relaxed life at jail

318
iv. Delayed Justice System

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles have knowledge about the rights and
privileges provided under the law/JJSO, 2000
2
Juveniles are happy with the behavior of jail staff
and police at the time of conviction
3
Parents/guardian have the provision to hire a lawyer
for litigation of their children/wards
4
Government provided free legal counseling to
juveniles
5
Delays in the justice process has adverse effects on
juveniles
6
The jail staff or police demand a bribe in return for
access to judge

319
v. Exclusive Courts

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juvenile cases are tried at the adult court
2
Juveniles are treated as adult criminals in court
3
Juvenile cases in the courts are heard publicly
4
Juveniles cases are tried satisfactory in adult court
5
Juvenile suffered mentally from the lengthy and
costly procedure of the courts
6
Recidivism rate may increase with association of
juveniles with adult criminals in courts

320
vi. Relation with Gangsters

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles interact frequently with the adult criminals
at jail
2
The jail staff has proper check and balance on the
interaction of juveniles with adult criminals
3
Juveniles are frank with the adult criminals at the jail
4
Juvenile prisoners are using cigarettes, snuff, hashish
or marijuana, etc. at the jail
5
Adult criminals are giving cigarette, snuff, hashish
or marijuana or cash money to juveniles at jail
6
Juveniles have relations with the gangs at jail
7
Cigarette, Naswar and Marijuana are any time
available to the gangs
8
Juveniles join gangs because of physical and
financial support

321
vii. Social Marginalization

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles are excluded from social activities and then
they look for crimes
2
Juveniles experience domestic violence before they
become criminal/delinquents
3
There are conflicting situations in the area before a
juvenile commits a crime
4
Juveniles are not aware of punishment before they
commit a crime
5
Juveniles are not afraid of the consequences of a
crime

322
viii. Recidivism

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles were ever arrested before they were
incarcerated for the second time
2
Juveniles used drugs or affiliated with gangs before
they became incarcerated
3
The jail environment is capable of reintegrationand
rehabilitation of juvenile prisoners
4
Juveniles were adjusted and are living happily in the
jail culture
5
The imprisonments of juveniles have weakened their
social bond with the social institutions like family
and peer groups etc.
6
The juveniles are receiving support in the jail life for
their reintegration into society

323
ix. Psychological Well-being

S.No Statement Yes No Don’t

Know
1
Juveniles are stressful and depressed at the jail
2
Juveniles‘ independence and liberty before
incarceration were affected due to jail life
3
Juveniles feel isolated because of being cut off from
their family and friends
4
Juveniles feel guilty or shameful due to their crime
and jail life
5
Juveniles have ever thought to commit suicide
6
Juveniles cry or weep if they get sad or depressed

324
x. Sexual Violence

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles are affected physically at jail
2
Juveniles are affected emotionally at jail
3
Juveniles are affected socially at jail
4
There are transgender or transsexual juveniles at jail
5
Juveniles are abused sexually at jail
6
Anyone from the Juveniles has desired any sexual
activity
7
Adults have criminal and sexual tendencies
8
Jail staff ever demanded sexual satisfaction from you
(verbal + oral + extreme sexual)

325
xi. Health

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
Juveniles have physical disabilities
2
Juveniles have mental health issues
3
At jail, mental health care is provided
4
Physical activities are there at the jail
5
There is water purification plant at jail
6
The ambulance service is there to shift juvenile
patients from jail to hospital in the care of ailment or
serious diseases

326
xii. Education

S.No Statement Agree Disagree Don’t Know

1
A formal educational facility is provided at the jail
2
Madrassa educational facility is provided at the jail
3
Vocational educational facility is provided at the jail
4
After their release from jail, juveniles tend to
continue their formal education
5
Juvenile‘s education has suffered due to jail life

327
Annexure-II (A)

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW WITH JUVENILES 15-18 YEARS OF AGE

I Personal Bio Data

01. Name ………………………………….

02. Age ………………………………….
03. Area ………………………………….

II Demographic Profile of Juvenile

04. Major Prompts: Economic Status + Residential + Family Structure + Parents related
information + Other related information
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

III Factors Responsible for Promoting Criminal Tendency

05. Crime related history

Major Prompts: Nature of crime + Ever before committed crime + Factors + Other
criminals in family + Other information
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

06. History of jail life

Major Prompts: Duration + Relations with jail mates + Facilities + Problems + Abuse
+ Diseases + Jail staff attitude + Education + Health + Personality disorder +
Stigmatization + Recidivism + Alienation + others related information
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

328
07. Litigation facility
Major prompts: (Parents+ state+ NGOs+ Duration+ Satisfaction with speed of trial)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

08. Perceived post jail life

Major prompts: (Continuation of Education + Productive Activities/Jobs + Religious
Duties/ Tableegh + No Criminal Activities + Respectful towards Parents and Elders)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

329
Annexure-II (B)

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW WITH JAIL STAFF

I Respondent’s Bio Data

09. Respondent No. ………………………………….

10. Name ………………………………….
11. Designation ………………………………….
12. Name of Jail ………………………………….
13. Length of Service ………………………………….

II Jail Environment and Its Impact on Juvenile Prisoners

14. Juvenile prisoners at the jail under your supervision:

Major prompts: Area + Age + Family Background + Nature of major crimes
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

15. Facilities to juvenile prisoners:

Major prompts: Sanitation + Drinking water + Cleanliness of Juvenile Prisoners +
Bath facilities + Mosquito Killer/net + Dirty Bed + Toilet/flush + stagnant water
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

16. Arrangement of ethics and manners orientation for juvenile prisoners at jail:
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

330
17. Juvenile prisoners Behavior at jail:
Major prompts: Obedient + Care of jail resources + Frequency of sexual abuse related
cases
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
18. The attitude of jail staff towards juvenile prisoners.
Major prompts: cooperative/affectionate/harsh + beating and bullying
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
19. Sports related facilities to juvenile prisoners at jail:
Major facilities (Indoor Games + outdoor games + jogging and exercising +
television)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
20. Relation of juveniles with the adult criminals at jail and monitoring/supervision over
their relations: Major prompts: frequency of interaction + gift given by adult prisoners
+ meeting with outside people + nature of crimes of adult criminals with whom they
interact + drugs availability and uses + sexually abused by adult prisoners +
intimidation fear by adult prisoners
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
21. Education facility available to juvenile prisoners at jail?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

331
22. Steps taken for controlling cruel or humiliating treatment or punishment to the
juvenile prisoners:
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
23. Rehabilitation/counseling arrangements for the juvenile prisoners at jail:
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
24. Your personal view regarding priority of infliction of punishment or rehabilitation of
the inmate juveniles:
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
25. Deficiencies/shortcomings at jails for the juvenile prisoners:
Major prompts: lack of qualified staff + Over Crowding of prisoners + facing
heterogeneous groups
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

332
Annexure-II (C)

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW WITH PROBATION OFFICERS

I Personal Bio Data

26. Name ………………………………….

27. Age ………………………………….
28. Designation ………………………………….
29. Length of Service ………………………………….

II Demographic Conditions of Juveniles

30. What are the eligibility/criteria for release on probation?

Major prompts: Nature of crime+ mandatory duration at jail+ procedure+ behavior at
jail+ progress towards rehabilitation + Sureties
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
31. What problems juvenile prisoners are normally facing at jail?
Major Prompts: low standard sanitation+ dirty bed+ no regular cleanliness+ no proper
flush+ contaminated water+ stagnant water+ bad drainage system+ sexual abuse + jail
staff attitude+ others
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

II Factors Responsible for Promoting Criminal Tendencies

32. How do you perceive the relationship of juvenile prisoners with adult criminals at
jail?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

333
33. How is the prospect of probation granted to the juvenile probationers?
Major prompts: Situation+ reason for failure + treatment + Surveillance + penalty of
relapse/unsuccessful cases+ penalty for sureties.
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
34. How do you perceive probation law in controlling criminal behavior?
Major Prompts: Surveillance + Treatment + rehabilitation.
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
What challenges/problems are there in applying probation?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
35. Is juvenile living in marginalized life at the time
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
What do you recommend for strengthening the probation law?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

334
Annexure-II (D)

IN-DEPTH INTERVIEW WITH LEGAL COUNSELS

I Personal Bio Data

36. Name ………………………………….

37. Sex ………………………………….
38. Specialized area of practice ………………………………….
39. Duration of Practice ………………………………….

II Justice System and Its Impact on Juvenile Prisoners

40. Pleading of juvenile cases

Major prompts: Ever pleaded + sponsoring body (State + NGOs + parents + others) +
Problems/threats + Cooperation by jail staff + Delay in disposal of cases
.…………………………………………………………………………………………
…...……………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
41. Provisions to the juveniles under JJSO, 2000, and its practicability in the field
Major prompts: Exclusive juvenile courts + Borstal Institution + Free legal counsel +
Probation + meeting with lawyer + hand cuffs and fetters
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
42. Protection to the juvenile through general law Pakistan Penal Code (PPC)?
Major prompts: Protection from ill environment + Health + Laborious hazards work +
Lack of education, recreation and other facilities + Sexual Abuse
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

335
43. Major Considerable points/grounds of child related cases
Major Prompts: Family related + Abuse + treated harshly
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
44. Major socio-psychological problems/discomforts due to delayed judicial trial
Major prompts: Relationship with other inmates and jail staff + Stress + Anxiety +
Fear
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
45. Major problems related to children in existing law
Major Prompts: delayed justice+ juvenile courts+ costly legal system+ law regarding
exclusive jails.
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………

336