This article has three purposes; to clear 1) the concept of status offense, 2) the borderline and the relationship between status offender and juvenile offender, and 3) these between status offender and trifling juvenile delinquent. Article 3.1 (3) of the Juvenile Law (1948) provides two conditions, with which Family Court may have jurisdiction over the status offenders. The first one is composed of four kinds of behavior, and it is better than having nothing like this (cf. the former Juvenile Law (1922) Art. 4 (1)). Though, their connotation and denotation are too vague to work as the effective restriction for the fundamental human rights. The second one is the status offender's proneness to commit a crime. But, because of the technical reasons, to make the exact prediction of the future criminal action is almost impossible still now. So, the prediction seems to be the one based on the common sense only, and its persuasion depends, not on the result of scientific investigations, but on the ability shaping the documentary evidence. Protective measures are taken according not to the gravity of the crime, but to the necessity of protection, and the Family Court pre-sentence investigators, whose fields are sociology, psychology, or pedagogy, work just for this purpose. So, the necessity of protection is the third condition, and its meaning should be the effectiveness of correctional treatment, and the worthiness of protection. In 1985, among the 291,789 persons dealt with protective procedures at the Family Court, status offenders were only 4,560 persons (1.6%). As to the status offender, the ratio of protective measures was 22.1% higher than that for the total, and among them the ratio of committal to Juvenile Training School was 12.9% higher than that for the total. It is said that the necessity of protection of status offender is greater than that of juvenile offender. But, only the status offenders with the greatest necessity of protection are selected to be referred or informed by the juvenile police. Trifling juvenile delinquents, whose behavior was almost the same as the status offenders', and whom the juvenile police did not need to refer or inform to the Family Court or the Child Guidance Center, were 1,477,134 persons in 1985. In accordance with the increase of the juvenile police case-workers, the declining tendency of the number of status offender will continue.

抄録全体を表示

I examined what kind of concrete behaviors were stipulated as predelinquency in its concept. I'll leave abstract discussion on the concept of pre-delinquency to the scholars and judges. I also tried to clarify, from a variety of data, whether or not difference between pre-delinquent and a similar concept of "misdemeanor juvenile" (Furyo-koi Shonen) devised by the police was obvious enough. I learned: If a misdemeanor juvenile has committed any one of such behaviors as runaway from home, drug addiction, violence and fight, he is probably considered to be a pre-delinquent. And when the misdemeanor juvenile under the police guidance is regarded as having rehabilitated himself, he is not probably refferred to the Family Court as a pre-delinquent. (It is obvious that the police decides whether the juveniles are pre-delinquents or not.) The exsisting Juvenile Law has inadequacies regarding pre-delinquency. The followings will exemplify the exhibited problems; 1. Many pre-delinquents are sent to the Family Court escorted by the police (The police actually takes charge of them and escort them to the Family Court on the pretext that they go together voluntarily). 2. The pre-delinquents are referred to the Detention House in so many cases. This comes because some judges decide by themselves without hearing the research secretary (of the family court)' opinions. 3. Police officers often want to visit the juveniles confined in the Detention House for the purpose of information-gathering. 4. Further, there is no legal controle when the police try to find pre-delinquents. There is no legal basis when the police guide the pre-delinquents and misdemeanor juveniles, either. Something must be done immediately to cope with these circumstances from the view point of juveniles' (fundamental) human rights.

抄録全体を表示

Advocacy of human rights free from authoritative powers has been more intensified recently. The standpoint of protection of such human rights often tends to maintain that the regulations of pre-delinquency violate juveniles' human rights through their abusive application. It is right in part. Overemphasis of this risk, however, may overlook another fact that these regulations at the same time defend juveniles from factors which may deteriorate their lives. Consequently, socially handicapped boys and girls will be deprived of their human rights in dual senses: First, through the damage by social handicap; second, by being neglected in the community. The regulations and application of them are by no means without any problems. This article, however, attempted to show their validity from the latter aspect of protecting juveniles' human rights against harmful social factors, through presentation of a pre-delinquent's case and statistics related to pre-delinquency.

抄録全体を表示

When we take a look at the Crime Index, when it compares the crime rate of 1985 with 1975, we find that forcible rape has increased by 55.7%, aggravated assault by 49.2%, larceny-theft by 15.9%, motor vehicle theft by 10.2% and robbery by 7%. In contrast, murder has decreased by 8.1% and burglary has decreased by 6.8%. As the result, prison and jail populations have doubled in a past decade. U.S. jail population was 234,500 in 1985... a new record and a 46% increase in only six years. In. the case of California, the prison population was 20,345 in 1976 but by 1985 rose to 47,075. Overcrowding has become the most serious problem in correctional treatment in the prisons. Folsom Prison, for example has had their educational program and vocational program severely influenced by its overcrowded situation. Wherever we go, we can find overcrowding in prisons and jails. In order to bring a solution of this kind of problem, a concept of private prisons has arisen. Private firms argue that they can operate detention facilities more economically and efficiently than the public sector. For example, Corrections Corporation of America, which is one of the private firms, is coducting the management, leasing, development and ownership of prisons and other correction and detention facilities and institutions in the private sector as follows: 1. Bay County Jail, (196-bed jail) Panama City, Florida 2. Bay County Jail Workcamp/Jail Annex, (174-bed) Panama City, Florida 3. Houston INS, (350-bed facility for illegal aliens for the U.S. Dept. of Immigration and Naturalization Service) Houston, Texas 4. Laredo Processing Center, (208-bed facility for illegal aliens) Laredo, Texas 5. Silverdale, (360-bed men's workhouse and women's jail) Chattanooga, Tennessee 6. Shelby Training Center, (150-bed secure juvenile training Center) Memphis, Tennessee 7. Tall Trees, (48-bed juvenile home) Memphis, Tennessee 8. Santa Fe County Detention Facility, (133-bed jail) Santa Fe, New Mexico 9. Fayetteville Community Treatment Center, (24-bed halfway house for Federal Bureau of Prisons) Fayetteville, North Carolina

抄録全体を表示

In Italia il campo della criminologia e stato fino ad anni recenti monopolizzato dalle tesi positivistiche e soprattutto ha avuto un processo di elaborazione e di ricerca quasi del tutto separate dalla sociologia. Ma dalla seconda meta degli anni cinquanta che alcune ricerche sociologiche studiano criminalita e devianza attraverso un modello interpretative che privilegia le cause sociali della criminalita. Sviluppando il modello della emarginazione sociale e il modello della reazione sociale, inoltre introducendo il punto di vista che privilegia le fasi politico-economiche della criminalita, oggi la criminologia critica che e stata sviluppata dal gruppo dell' Universita di Bologna dalla meta degli anni settanta forma il campo peculiare; una ricerca della possibilita di costruire "una politica criminale per il movimento operaio." Questo lavolo, fissando l'attenzione su questa tendenza, all'inizio, ricerca i fattori politico-economici che hanno fatto inevitable un aumento della criminologia critica attraverso il metodo in cui il processo di sviluppo della criminologia italiana per uno secolo passato e situate nel processo di mutamento della situazione socio-economica in Italia e e connesso al mutamento della struttura sociale. Poi, assumendo questo lavolo, caratterizziamo l'originalita, cioe l'ipotesi e la costruzione della teoria criminologica del gruppo di Bologna che ha esercitato una grand' influenza sulla nuova criminologia recentemente e esaminiamo l'analisi che questo gruppo ha condotto sulla situazione di sviluppo della politica penale/criminale in Italia. Alia fine descriviamo la situazione problematica teorico-pratica della criminologia critica che affronta le offese duplici: da un lato una minaccia per la liberta e la sicurezza civile causata dalla frequenza dei terrorismi, dall'altro uno sviluppo della politica di "legge e ordine" contro questa minaccia. Oggi in Italia la questione criminale e fatta il punto strategico di controllo sociale dal stato e "la colonizzazione del campo di liberta e sicurezza civile" sta avanzando costantememte attraverso la politica di "legge e ordine" stata iniziata dalle legislazioni contro i terrorismi. Nella situazione in cui la conoscenza di necessita che dobbiamo affrontare questa tendenza di involuzione sta aumentando, la criminologia critica non ha potuto sviluppare "una politica criminale alternativa" effettiva nella qualita di strategia pratica. Sotto questa situazione di crisi, la esistenza stessa della criminologia critica e messa in questione. Dunque al presente siamo premuto dalla necessita che riesaminiamo le ipotesi e la base costrutiva di questa teoria.

抄録全体を表示

On peut dire que le passage francais d'une penologie traditionnelle enfermee dans sa cloture penitentiaire a une sociologie des penalites a ete marque par des travaux varies s'attachant aux mecanismes de criminalisation primaire ou secondaire. Il s'agit de l'interactionisme en criminologie francaise qui voit le meeanisme de controle sociale comme pouvoir et domination. Cette perspective est opposee a celle structural-fonctionaliste qui voit la deviance comme un dysfonctionnement du controle. Mais, en meme temps elle va a l'encontre de l'acceptation, courante en criminologie japonaise, de l'interactionisme qui s'est concretise dans les recherches sur le fonctionnement selectif de la justice penale et sur la recidive. Alors que les crimilogues japonais sont aujourd'hui en passe d'abandonner l'interactionisme sans avoir prig conscience du changement profond qu'il a entraine en criminologie, l'interactionisme francais aborde les analyses des niveaux intermediaires entre la formation de la societe et les produits des mecanismes penaux, comme celui du debat public, celui du para-oet peripenale ainsi que celui de l'administration de la justice penale. Cette serie de variables intermediaires est susceptible de rendre compte de la forme specifique de la justice penale dans son contexte historique. Or, en France, le debat qui a ete suscite par le projet de loi dit de privatisation des prisons a finalement aboutit au plan de construction et de gestion par l'Etat de nouveaux etablissements penitentiaires. Ceci est un theme adapte au cadre d'analyse qu'amene l'interactionisme francais. On ne peut en ignorer les variables intermediaires que les doctrines traditionnelles de penologie mettent a l'ecart. Ces variables ont toutefois defini la reponse specifique a la crise penitentiaire en France aujourd'hui. Ce sont les deux strategies politiques (gouvernementale et presidentielle) qui apparaissent sous le regime dit de cohabitation. C'est la raison pour laquelle l'auteur a choisi ce theme. D'autre part, il semble necessaire d'analyser les mecanismes intermediares japonais. En effet, par exemple, alors que l'on n'admet, au Japon, aucune crise penitentiaire, on discute le projet de loi qui permet d'utiliser les etablissements policiers a la place des maisons d'arret dont la construction massive est un des objets principaux en France du debat sur la privatisation des prisons. Sans connaitre ces mecanismes intermediaires qui definissent le contexte et la direction du debat penologique, on se content toujours de la securite japonaise qui ne serait plus le sujet du debat criminologique.

抄録全体を表示

本稿は,神奈川県下の対照的な2つの地域に居住している少年たちにイソタビューを行ない,彼らの教育歴を基にして,不良行為のパターンを比較検討したものである.本稿では,この2つの地域を「南」と「北」と呼ぶことにする.例えば,社会経済的に中の下の階層に属する人々が多くを占める地域(南)に居住している少年たちにおいては,中の上の階層の人々の住む地域(北)の少年たちに比べ,不良行為の平均行為回数が非常に多い,ということが公式資料によって明らかとされている.この南と北の少年たちの不良行為経験の差の基部には,環境条件と両親の社会階層的背景が生み出す学歴の質の差が作用していると考えられる.南と北,2つの少年集団が通学しているそれぞれの中学校は,各地域やその周辺地域の社会経済的水準を反映したものとなっている.南の少年たち全員は,いわゆる荒廃した中学校へ通い,これに対し,北の少年たちは平穏な中学校あるいは私立の付属中学校に通っている.南の少年たちは,北の少年たちに比較し,学業成績は低く,多様で多量な学校問題を抱えている.結果として,北の少年では,大学進学率の劣る低ラソクの高校卒業者は15パーセソトでしかないのに対し,南の少年では,これが40パーセソトにも達している.例えば,低ラソクの高校の生徒は,多くの者が不良行為を働き,その回数も多い.これら低ラソクの高校では,高ラソクの学校よりもより生徒を厳しく管理する.そのことがまた,低ラソクの高校の多くの少年たちを反抗させ,不良行為へと走らせる原因ともなっている.学校のランクはまた,少年たちの最終学歴の到達水準に関連する.高ラソクの高校へ通った少年たちの半数が大学に進学したのに対し,低ランクの高校の少年たちでは,わずかしか大学進学者がいなかった.さらにその上,北の少年たちの多くが,大学に進学したのみならず,出身家庭が社会経済的に豊かであることから,非常に授業代の高い職業学校(専門学校)へも同時に通学しているのである.本稿は,以上の様な事実に対し,レベリソグ理論を適用し,結論づける.日本の社会においては,刻印づけによる社会的統制が,低階層の少年たちの通う学校に対し厳しく作用している.こうした問題な社会的統制が,少年の不良行為のみならず,今日の日本社会を覆う陰鬱な学歴問題を生じさせる主要な原因と成っている,と考察される.

抄録全体を表示

日本と韓国の非行少年について,比較研究をおこなう手はじめとして,両国の公の統計の分析をおこなった.公の統計を用いる比較研究には,多くの問題点が存在している.しかし,日本と韓国の比較研究は,他国間のそれと比べて,その問題点は,より軽微であると思われる.何故ならば,日本と韓国との間には,統計作成の方法,法律における犯罪の定義等で,類似性がみられるからである.公の統計によると,日本では,1970年代の後半から1980年代前半にかけて,人口あたりの非行少年の比率が増大している.この間,成人や年長少年の犯罪は,かならずしも増加していない.著しく増加したのは,年少少年による軽微な犯罪である.このような犯罪の数は,統制機関の活動如何によって,簡単に増減しうる.戦後最悪といわれた高い非行率は,社会統制機関,特に警察が,補導および検挙の活動を活発化したために,もたらされたのであろう.韓国においても,これと同じ現象が見られるであろうか.韓国では,1970年代に,高度経済成長期を迎えた.この間,成人の犯罪率も,少年のそれも,ともに増加している.少年が犯した犯罪の内訳では,日本に比べて,暴力犯の比率が高い.身分別では,学生の比率が高まりつつあるとはいえ,無職が3分の1強を占めている.経済状態では,下層階級の者が9割近くを占めている.年齢別では,18〜19歳の年長少年が,半数近くとなっている.公の統計から,これらの特徴を読みとる限りでは,韓国の社会統制機関は,成人や年長少年の犯罪の処理に,追われているようである.日本で最近見られているような現象は,韓国において近い将来に生じるとは,いえないようである.

抄録全体を表示