² “South African children speak out” (1993) I International Journal of Children's Rights 71–81 (introducing the “International summit on the rights of children in South Africa” where the Children's Charter of South Africa was drawn up and adopted).

³ Skelton, Ann, Developing a Juvenile Justice System for South Africa: Internal Instruments and Restorative Justice, Cape Town, 1995.Google Scholar

⁴ While the majority of the youth answered a nine-queslion questionnaire, those in diversion programmes (the rehabilitated offender population) were also asked whether they felt the diversion programme had helped them.

⁵ NICRO is an acronym for National Institute for Crime Prevention and the Rehabilitation of Offenders. NICRO in tandem with the University of Cape Town Institute of Criminology and Lawyers for Human Rights in Pietermaritzburg helped to initiate the creation and implementation of restorative youth justice philosophies such as diversion programmes.

⁶ Quattro Pro, Version 5.1.

⁷ NICRO staff in these regions assisted in contacting “random” youth. The majority of the youth were school students; however, some may have been reached during NICRO's Whistle Week youth activities. All NICRO branches were requested not to solicit participation based on personal knowledge of the youth or in affiliation with NICRO services as that bias could destroy the random nature of this population.

⁸ YES is an acronym for Youth Empowerment Scheme. The YES programme is the current foothold of the diversion programmes suggested by both NICRO and the Juvenile Justice proposals. Although it varies slightly, depending on the NICRO branch involved, the basic scheme consists of a six to eight-week programme in which youth meet once a week to participate in activities and discussion related to crime awareness and prevention. In an attempt to rehabilitate the family and community structures surrounding the youth, the programmes incorporate both individual youth needs as well as needs the parents identify. Discharge of a criminal record is dependant on the youth's successful completion of this diversion option.

⁹ Although the six youth were quite competent to understand the questions on the questionnaire, their life-style had not permitted five out of the six the opportunity to develop literacy skills necessary to complete the questionnaire in the manner previously described. Instead, these youth were individually taken to an interview room where a Sotho-speaking NICRO worker read them the questions and then recorded their impromptu answers for them. There was no discussion between the NICRO worker and youth, thus affording no blatant opportunity to influence this population's answers. There also did not appear to be a discomfort or shyness on the part of any of the youth, which could have led to less candid responses. Furthermore, although three different NICRO workers completed the interviewing, the results of the questionnaire do not indicate large discrepancies that could be the result of either an interviewer's influence or emotional compromising of the youth.

¹⁰ A large township near Durban.

¹¹ Although all 22 were Zulu-speaking, they were also proficient enough in English to be involved in this workshop. They were also given the option to complete a Zulu questionnaire instead of English if they felt more comfortable in Zulu.

¹² After completion of the questionnaire, the facilitator divided the youth into groups of five or six. She then gave each group a fictional scenario involving a youth in conflict with the law and asked them to decide his fate. The facilitator led a discussion of what Juvenile Justice means within both the small groups and among several groups. Next, the workshop facilitator described four different NICRO diversion options, one at a time. After each option, the facilitator gave the youth time to discuss the option within their groups. Each group recorded pros, cons and possible solutions or alternatives for each option on an answer sheet. The facilitator then initiated a discussion among the youth about how they see youth's role and their personal roles in a Juvenile Justice system. Afterwards, they were asked to decide the fate of a different fictional youth in conflict with the law.

¹³ The “random” population has an overall average age of 15.52, with males at 15.87 and females at 15.22. The discrepancy here is slight and even less significant when combined with the street kids population, creating a combined average age for male youth of 15.69. Thus, it is clear that the age discrepancy in the overall sample, although still slight, is the result of the age and gender compositions of the rehabilitated offenders and youth development populations.

¹⁴ This is not atypical. In fact, an examination of the youth referred to YES programmes from September 1992 to April 1994 reveals that more than 50% of the referrals are between 16 and 17 years of age.

¹⁵ These percentages are less than 100% because some youth did not indicate a gender.

¹⁶ See Muntingh, L., A Quantitative Survey of two NICRO Diversion Projects, NICRO Research Series No. 2., 1995, 21.Google Scholar

¹⁷ In an effort to prevent confusion while reading this paper, masculine pronouns will be used as inclusive of both male and female youth in the Voices sample.

¹⁸ Because three youth did not identify a race these percentages do not add up to 100%.

¹⁹ All Indian youth in this sample fall within the rehabilitated offender population type.

²⁰ African: 60% unknown language, 36% English, 3% Afrikaans. White: 68% unknown language, 32% English. Coloured: 50% unknown language, 38% English, 13% Afrikaans.

²¹ African: 28% rehabilitated offender youth, 72% “random” youth. White: 58% rehabilitated offender youth, 42% “random” youth. Coloured: 63% rehabilitated offender youth, 38% “random” youth.

²² These percentages are based on a sample of 126 youth because 36 questionnaires were not able to be translated.

²³ See the discussion under Youth Role for further analysis because although this may be true there also appear to be underlying racial or cultural differences influencing the youth perception within this particular population.

²⁴ Only 50% of the street kids responded to this question. The other two chose “rights and justice for persons under 18”.

²⁵ Although the Coloured rehabilitated offender youth are not specifically addressed, they too are relevant. Some 50% of them believe that youth roles are consistent with friendship while the other 50% believe the youth role is consistent with education and training. In light of apartheid structures and considerations (further discussed in the Conclusions and Recommendations), it is not surprising that Coloured youth fall directly between White and African children, receiving “middle education” and so forth.

²⁶ Muntingh, L., in discussion at the NICRO National office, Cape Town, South Africa, August 1995.Google Scholar

²⁷ “All” refers to the youth whose questionnaires were translated. Thirty-six questionnaires from two Xhosa-speaking “random” youth populations were not translated for questions 8 or 9.

²⁸ NICRO Vaal, South Africa, 1995.

²⁹ Child advocates in South Africa have expressed a concern that adults are forcing youth to commit crimes because they know that there is the possibility of diversion for youth as well as laws limiting the amount of time youth may be kept in Places of Safety for non-serious and even serious offences, whereas for adults, there is only a harsh legal system with less forgiving solutions.