Table of Content

• Comments
  • Purpose
    1. The purpose of Article 58 is to determine the consequences, on the child, of the implementation of diversion from the criminal offence and it attracts the attention of the proceeding body, namely the prosecutor’s office, to the procedural steps it shall follow after the implementation of the diversion measure.

     

    2. The purpose of Article 58 is to specify the procedural actions necessary to be undertaken by the prosecutor in case of the diversion, such as the non-commencement of the criminal proceeding, in compliance with Article 2 of this, providing the criminal proceeding has not started, and its dismissal, providing the criminal proceeding has started.

     

    3. At the same time, the purpose of Article 58 of the CCJC is to determine the obligations of the prosecutor as the competent authority with an importance towards: the victim, the child who is the subject of the criminal justice and the superior body. Also, this article determines obligations for the Ministry of Justice in order for this decision-making of the prosecutor to be applicable.

     

    4. Article 59 of the CCJC, intends to determine the value, the importance, the care, the obligation and the form that the competent body shall apply for receiving the child’s consent for the enforcement of the diversion from the criminal prosecution. Article 59 intends to provide the appropriate importance to the child’s consent and to highlight that there is no diversion if the consent of the child has not been taken and if the requirements of this article have not been implemented regarding the guaranteeing of the fact that the child has understood the diversion and the form of receiving this consent.
  • Scope
    5. Article 58 of the CCJC has a completely procedural nature in its three first paragraphs, meanwhile the fourth paragraph determines the obligations for the Minister of Justice as an assistance for the implementation of the agreement. The article has been formulated according to the classical legislative technique. Its first three paragraphs provide for the body, which according to this article implements this procedure, namely the prosecutor; the procedural steps followed by him after the implementation of the measure of diversion from the criminal proceeding and the decision-making of the prosecutor as a consequence of this decision.  Article 58 of the CCJC provides for clearly and comprehensively the consequences and the procedures that are implemented in the case when the prosecutor implements the measure of diversion.

     

    6. Article 58 of the CCJC has a descriptive nature of the procedural steps that have to be followed during the process of the implementation of the diversion measure and provides for the participants in this procedure which are: the decision-making body, in the concrete case the prosecutor and the parties who are duly notified on the decision made by the prosecutor, the victim and accordingly the defence counsel of the child, his legal or procedural representative. 

     

    7. Article 58, paragraph 4 clarifies that the elements of the agreement, which shall be positioned as the final act of the entire process, as well as the rules for the implementation of the program, stipulated in the agreement, shall be part of the order of the Minister of Justice. According to Article 141, paragraph 2 of this Code, new sub legal acts shall be issued within 6 months after this code enters into force, for the fulfilment of the obligations provided for in Article 58, paragraph 4.

     

    8. Article 59 of the CCJC is constructed to highlight the fact that measure of diversion is definitely taken only upon the written consent of the child, and when it is appropriate (see point 1) of his legal representative as well. The obligation for the provision of the consent by the child for taking the measure of diversion is necessary, in order for the parties to have the possibility to exercise the right of consent. The criminal justice bodies shall make every decision taking into consideration the best of the child according to the CCJC, the Convention of the UNO on the Rights of the Child and the European Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights. The consent given or taken under the conditions of threatening, intimidating, deceiving or any other mode of physical or mental violence is not valid and makes the entire procedure invalid. 

     

    9. Article 59 of the CCJC is constructed on a structure to function for taking the child’s consent for the measure of diversion. The article underlines clearly and precisely the mandatory form of the consent, which is the written consent, and the way of reaching up to this phase of obtaining the consent to guarantee the free and the non-fictive consent. After the child is introduced to the measure proposed by the competent body, he shall necessarily give the consent, in order for the competent body to decide its implementation eventually.  Free consent is a very delicate aspect. The freedom of consent exists if a clear interior is based on a clear informing and understanding of the process and of its effects is existing.
  • Comments
    10. Regarding the meaning of Article 58 of the CCJC “is a circumstance for the non-initiation of the criminal proceeding, if the criminal proceeding has not been initiated and a circumstance for its dismissal if the criminal proceeding has been initiated”, the legislator has paid attention to provide a bigger action space to the prosecutor to make a decision for taking the diversion measure. The diversion measure, as an alternative measure, if it is implemented, obliges the prosecutor to make a decision for the non-initiation of the prosecution against the child in conflict with the law. The competence of the prosecutor to make a decision for the enforcement of diversion extends and has been evaluated as a circumstance for the non-initiation of the criminal proceeding. The latter is seen in harmony and in compliance with Article 290, paragraph 1, letter “e” of the CPC[1] and Article 291 of the CPC.[2] These two articles provide for the legal basis in relation to the circumstances and the decision for the non-initiation of the proceeding. Furthermore, the prosecutor may also decide to suspend the criminal proceeding if this proceeding has started according to the content of Article 328 paragraph 1 letter “f” of the CPC[3] which provides for the discretion of the dismissal for the “other cases provided for in the law”, making a direct connection between the CPC and Article 58 of the CCJC.   Even though Article 328, paragraph 1 of the CPC provides that the Prosecutor decides to dismiss the charge or the criminal offence, if there is a proceeding for a criminal contravention according to the provisions of this article and the legal criteria provided for in Article 55 of the CCJC, the prosecutor has the discretion to decide on the suspension of the case when he implements the measure of diversion from the criminal prosecution even when there is the case of a proceeding for crimes as the legislator has been based on one of the basic principles of this Code, the best interest of the child.

     

    11. Notifications provided for in article 58 of the CCJC: The decision taken by the prosecutor for the non-initiation or the dismissal of the criminal proceeding shall be notified to the head of the prosecutor’s office and to the victim, in order for the latter to claim compensation. This obligation shall be considered in relation to Article 58 of the CPC[4] paragraph 1, letter “g”, which stipulates the rights of the victim of the criminal offence among which is also the right to claim the compensation for the damage and to be accepted as civil plaintiff in the criminal process. Accordingly, this decision is notified to the defence counsel of the child, his legal or procedural representatives. The definition “Legal representative” is introduced in Article 3 paragraph 16 of this Code, providing for as such the parent, the relative or the guardian of the child, who participates in the procedure of the criminal justice for children to defend the child’s interest. The definition “Procedural representatives” is given at Article 3 paragraph 17 of this Code, stipulating as such the person in the meaning provided for in the law into force “For the rights and the protection of the child”[5] Article 3, point 12, the one who will carry out the child’s procedural representation according to the provisions of this Code. According to the law into force a “Procedural representative” is the person appointed by the proceeding authority from the list sent by the unit for the protection of the child, who will carry out the procedural representation of the child in case his legal representative is absent, or in case of a conflict of interest between him and the child and has representative rights on behalf of the child in conflict with the law, or the witness/victim child, to protect the best interest of the child.   

     

    12. Regarding the interpretation of the phrase “shall conclude an agreement with the child on the type of the diversion measure and/or mediation”, Article 58 paragraph 3 of the CCJC provides that in case the diversion measure is taken by the prosecutor, the latter decides on the non-initiation or the dismissal of the criminal proceeding and at the same time concludes an agreement with the child on the type of the diversion measure and/or the mediation. The potential alternative measures for the diversion from the criminal prosecution are provided in Article 62 of this Code and more specifically in Article 63-69 of the CCJC. After the child is introduced to the measure proposed by the prosecutor and has given the consent according to Article 59 of the CCJC, the prosecutor decides on its final enforcement. It is crucial that the child in conflict with the law shall be aware and this will come as a result of a comprehensive and detailed information provided by the prosecutor on the facts how the execution procedure of the diversion measure shall be carried out, the potential consequences, the various conclusions from this measure such as the success, the failure or the partial solution. Such information is necessary in order for the child to have the opportunity to exercise the right for consent. The criminal justice bodies shall take every decision while considering the best interest of the child according to the provisions of the CCJC, the Convention of the UNO on Children’s Rights and the European Convention on the Exercise of Children’s Rights. The agreement is considered as the final act where the type of the diversion measure and/or the mediation is determined clearly and comprehensively. 

     

    13. Article 58, paragraph 4 provides that the elements of the agreement, as well as the rules for the implementation of the relevant program, stipulated in the agreement, shall be part of the order of the Minister of Justice. According to Article 141, paragraph 2 of this Code, new sub legal acts shall be issued within 6 months after this code enters into force, for the fulfilment of the obligations provided for in
        Article 58, paragraph 4.

     

    14. The phrase “only upon the written consent’ according to Article 59 of the CCJC stipulates the obligation for providing the child’s consent on one side and the respecting of the form in writing for taking the diversion measure, on the other. It is mandatory and at the same time essential that the prosecutor and the court shall accordingly have the minutes in writing specifying clearly the child’s consent and when appropriate (see point 1) also the consent of his legal representative, who is the parent, the relative or the guardian of the child who participate in the procedure of criminal justice for children to protect the child’s interests. Article 59, paragraph 1 positions the term “consent” as a formal principled mandatory element. This consent is provided upon the free will based on a clear informing and understanding of the process and of its effects. It is crucial that the child should be aware that this is achieved through the comprehensive information from the competent body on the way how the procedure of the diversion measure implementation is carried out, which service and who will carry it out concretely, on the potential consequences, on the various conclusions of its implementation.   The criminal justice bodies are in charge of providing the information.

     

    15. Paragraph 2 of Article 59 of the CCJC provides how to proceed in the case when the legal representative cannot be located or when the child does not have relations with him or when the legal representative has a conflict of interest with the child giving the right to the competent body to appoint a procedural representative, who may give the consent for the diversion measure. Precisely, through the phrase “when appropriate”, used at paragraph 1 Article 59 of this Code, the legislator intends to provide for the case when the competent body should obtain the consent in writing of the legal representative, too. In this sense the legislator has had in mind the case when the legal representative cannot be located, the legal representative may have a conflict of interest or any other case according to the provisions of Article 74, paragraph 1, letter “a” to letter “ç” of this Code which require from the prosecuting body to notify Unit on the Protection of the Rights of the Child and to assign a person from the UPRC in accordance to paragraph 3 of Article 74 letters ‘a’ to ‘dh’.

     

    16. The phrase used at paragraph 3 of this article “the child shall be provided with counselling and free legal aid service” is related to the principle that the children should be treated with care, sensitivity, honesty in compliance with their age and background, and should be treated respectfully in every case/procedure taking into consideration their personal situation, their well-being and their special needs, as well as their physical and psychological integrity. This treatment shall be provided to them in any ways, no matter how they have settled contacts with the judicial or non-judicial proceedings, without taking into consideration their legal status and the capacities in every procedure or case. The guaranteeing of the respect and the efficiency of the implementation of all the children’s rights shall be at the highest possible level in the justice systems of a country.  For this, it is required that justice be accessible and adapted according to the age-groups, fast and focused on the children’s needs and rights.  This includes the right for a fair legal process, the right to participate and to understand the procedures, the right to respect the private and family life as well integrity and dignity. The child shall be assisted by being provided with the appropriate legal assistance, which can be given by the competent body accordingly. Legal aid service and such information are necessary in order for the child to have the opportunity to exercise the right for consent. Legal aid can be provided by the defence counsel who can be appointed in any case to assist the child.

     

    17. The right of all the children to be informed on their rights shall be respected in the processes that include the child. The children shall get the appropriate access to justice and shall be consulted and shall be heard. This includes giving the appropriate importance to the children’s opinions taking into consideration their maturity and every issue they may have in relation with the communication. The children shall be taken into consideration and shall be treated as full holders of the rights and shall be entitled to enjoy their rights taking into consideration their capacity to create their viewpoints, as well as the circumstances of the case.

     

    18. According to paragraph 5 of Article 59 of the CCJC, which provides that the agreement shall be signed by the child and his defence counsel, it is understood that after the child and his defence counsel are informed comprehensively, they are considered as subjects who shall be the signatories of the agreement. The legislator has used the linker “and” to indicate that the agreement document shall bear both their signatures. According to Article 31 of this Code, the child’s defence counsel is present throughout the process. These are lawyers specialized in juvenile justice who provide legal assistance during the entire process.

     

    [1] See article 290 of the CPC: “Circumstances which do not permit the initiation of the proceeding”, amended with law no.35/2017.

    [2] See article 291 of the CPC: “Decision for the non-initiation of the proceeding”, amended with law no. 35/2017. 

    [3] See article 328 of the CPC: “Dismissal of the charge or case”, amended with law 8460, dated 11.02.1999, amended with law no.  35/2017. 

    [4] See article 58 of the CPC: “The right of the victim of the criminal offence”, amended with law no.  8813, dated 13.6.2002, amended with law no. 35/2017.

    [5] See Article 3 paragraph 12 of Law no. 18/2017 “On the rights and the protection of the child”.

  • Historic context
    19. It is the first time in the Albanian legislation that such a regulation as that of Article 58 and 59 of CCJM is provided for in the level of the Code, thus setting out the procedural steps of issuing the decision that follows the implementation of the measure of diversion guarantees or the minor in implementing the measure of diversion from the prosecution of the child in conflict with the law. More specifically, the Criminal Procedure Code approved by the law no 7905, dated 21.3.1995, as amended, by law no 8460, dated 11.2.1999, by law no 8813, dated 13.6.2002, by law no. 9085, dated 19.6.2003, by law no 9276, dated 16.9.2004, by law no 9911, dated 5.5.2008, by Decision of the Constitutional Court no.31, dated 17.5.2012, by law no.145/2013, dated 2.5.2013, by law no. 35/2017, did not have a similar provision before the adoption of the CCJC.

     

    20. In Chapter VII of CCJM, there have, for the first time, been provided for such measures as diversion from criminal proceedings, and from punishment through alternative measures, and there have been provided specific related rules.

     

    21. Seen from the perspective of the Criminal Code, a similar measure to the measure of diversion from the criminal prosecution is the measure of exemption of the minor from the punishment under Article 51 of the Criminal Code, which was imposed by the court, the latter referring to the low dangerousness of the criminal offence, concrete circumstances of commission and previous conduct of the minor. Under such circumstances, the court may decide to send the minor to an education institution. A novum, being brought about by the measure of diversion from the criminal prosecution according to Article 55 of CCJM is that it may be imposed by the prosecutor, which previously, based on Article 52 of the Criminal Code, could be imposed only by the court and this was the case after the conviction of the minor. The measure of diversion from the criminal prosecution is a measure which, in each instance, observe the best interest of the child, thus not holding him criminally accountable and ensuring to him his education through other alternative measures imposed on cases basis referring to the nature and gravity of the criminal offence having been committed.
  • International acts
    22. UNO Convention on the Rights of the Child (approved by the General Assembly of United Nations Organisation on 20 November 1989). Article 3, paragraph 1 of the Convention determines that in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. Article 12, paragraph 1 and 2, of the UNO Convention on the rights of the child provides for: 1. States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child. 2. For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law. Article 40 of the Convention on the administration of justice for children sets out standards as follows: 

    • The standard of the special and dignified treatment of every child alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law, in order for the child's sense of dignity and worth be developed, the human rights and fundamental freedoms be respected, taking account of the child's age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and the child's assuming a constructive role in society (Article 40/1 CRC)
    • The standard of non-retroactive consequences. No child shall be alleged as, be accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law by reason of acts or omissions that were not prohibited by national or international law at the time they were committed; (Article 40/1 of CRC) (Constitution of RA, Article 29);
    • The procedural guarantees for children in the criminal proceedings, thus the children alleged as or accused of having infringed the criminal law according to Article 40 of CRC include the presumption of innocence (Article 30 of the Constitution of RA), right to information (Article 31 of the Constitution of RA) and immediate examination of the case.

     

    23. Recommendation no. R (87) 20 on the social reactions to minors accused of having committed criminal offences encourages the conduct of the procedures of diversion and mediation. RECOMMENDATION No. R (87) 20 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON SOCIAL REACTIONS TO JUVENILE DELINQUENCY Provides:

    "II. Diversion - mediation 2. to encouraging the development of diversion and mediation procedures at public prosecutor level (discontinuation of proceedings) or at police level, in countries where the police has prosecuting functions, in order to prevent minors from entering into the criminal justice system and suffering the ensuing consequences; to associating Child Protection Boards or services to the application of these procedures; 3. to taking the necessary measures to ensure that in such procedures: - the consent of the minor to the measures on which the diversion is conditional and, if necessary, the co-operation of his family are secured; - appropriate attention is paid to the rights and interests of the minor as well as to those of the victim;"

    Link: http://archivio.transnazionalita.isfol.it/file/CoE_Rec_R87-20%20Eng.pdf. " Last accessed on 17.08.2017.

     

    24. The Committee of the Rights of the Child has prepared some specific recommendations according to article 40 of the CCR. Appropriate measures should be used to treat the children, avoiding the judicial procedures and guaranteeing the full respecting of human rights and legal guarantees.  “Rules of Pekin” broaden their meaning in the support they give to the avoidance of the criminal process in rule 11.  It should be taken into consideration that when it is the case of offenders who are children, the criminal proceeding should be avoided by the relevant authorities, according to rule 14 (1).  The police the prosecution office or other agencies related to the case of the children should be authorized to cover this case according to their discretion, without addressing to the formal hearings, in compliance with the criteria described herein, reflected in the domestic legislation as well as with the principles of these rules.  Every diversion from these procedures should be claimed by the child, the parent or the legal guardian, and this decision should be made by the relevant authority.  Several provisions such as the orders of surveillance, care, guidance, counselling, the release on parole and re-education; programs for the training, education and the teaching of professions, as well as other alternatives for provision of care by the institutions should be present to guarantee that the children are treated appropriately and in relation to the circumstances and their offence (Article 40).

     

    25. United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Alternative (Non-custodial) Measures: The Tokyo Rules (1990). The present Standard Minimum Rules provide a set of basic principles to promote the use of non-custodial measures, as well as minimum safeguards for persons subject to alternatives to imprisonment. The Rules are intended to promote greater community involvement in the management of criminal justice, specifically in the treatment of offenders, as well as to promote among offenders a sense of responsibility towards society. In order to provide greater flexibility consistent with the nature and gravity of the offence, with the personality and background of the offender and with the protection of society and to avoid unnecessary use of imprisonment, the criminal justice system should provide a wide range of non-custodial measures. The development of new non-custodial measures should be encouraged and closely monitored, and their use systematically evaluated. Consideration shall be given to dealing with offenders in the community avoiding as far as possible resort to formal proceedings or trial by a court, in accordance with legal safeguards and the rule of law. Non-custodial measures should be used in accordance with the principle of minimum intervention.

     

    26. Recommendation CM/Rec (2008)11 of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the European Rules for juvenile offenders subject to sanctions or measures. The aim of the recommendation is to better protect the rights and welfare of minors conflicting with the law and for developing the justice systems for minors to the interest of the minors. Juvenile offenders subject to sanctions or measures shall be treated with respect for their human rights. The sanctions or measures that may be imposed on juveniles, as well as the manner of their implementation, shall be specified by law and based on the principles of social integration and education and of the prevention of re-offending. Sanctions and measures shall be imposed by a court or another legally recognised authority they shall be subject to prompt judicial review and imposed for the minimum necessary period and only for a legitimate purpose.  The imposition and implementation of sanctions or measures shall be based on the best interests of the juvenile offenders, limited by the gravity of the offences committed (principle of proportionality) and take account of their age, physical and mental well-being, development, capacities and personal circumstances (principle of individualisation) as ascertained when necessary by psychological, psychiatric or social inquiry reports. 
• International standards/International references/Best examples

  Reports, opinions, recommendations and declarations

  • ‘Convention on the Rights of the Child’ being approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations Organisation on 200 November 1989, Article 3, point 1, Article 12, point 2, Article 15, point 2, Article 40, point 2 and point 4.
  • UNO Instructions on Preventing Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Instructions)
  • Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice ("The Beijing Rules") Articles 10 (2)(b), 10(3), 14(4)
  • The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Law no 7727/30.06.1993) and the Additional Protocol to the Convention.
  • United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty (Havana rules 1990);
  • United Nations Standard Minimum Rules pertaining to Non-custodial measures (Tokyo rules) (1990).
  • Vienna Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal Justice System taking account of the day of discussion of the Committee 1995 on the justice administration for juveniles.
  • Declaration on the Rights of the Child.
  • European Union Level Instruments.
  • EU Charter of Human Rights
  • Lisbon Treaty 01.12.2009

             

  American Department of Justice Office of juvenile justice and crime prevention. National Justice Institute (Cases and practises)

  According to the study analysis of the cases and practises of the Office of Juvenile Justice it results that:

  “Practice Theory

  Diversion is primarily grounded in two different theories. Labelling theory emphasizes the stigma and negative consequences that youths may experience if they are labelled delinquent at a young age (Becker 1963). Differential association theory argues that youths can learn antisocial attitudes and behaviours by associating with peers who exhibit such behaviour (Cressey 1952). Diversion attempts to minimize the effects of labelling associated with offending and limit the opportunities youths have to associate with antisocial peers by reducing their contact and exposure to the juvenile justice system.

  Recently, research on the negative impacts of formal system processing and empirical work on the risk/need/responsivity model also provide support for the use of diversion. Research has emerged indicating that the likelihood of reoffending actually increases as youths are further processed into the juvenile justice system, which supports the idea of diverting youths away from the system (Petrosino, Turpin–Petrosino, and Guckenburg 2010). Likewise, the risk/need/responsivity model—which, in part, emphasizes that intensive services should be reserved for high-risk juveniles—also supports the use of diversion so that limited resources can be directed to more appropriate juvenile offenders (Andrews and Bonta 2010).

  Practice Components

  There are generally two different types of diversion programs: caution/ warning programs and formal programs. Caution or warning programs are the least invasive. In these programs, youths are diverted out of the system with no further action, aside from a warning or formal caution, usually from the police. Alternatively, formal diversion programs usually involve some conditions youths must fulfil, including an admission of guilt and an agreement to participate in a diversion intervention. Successful completion of diversion programming will generally result in no further judicial processing (Wilson and Hoge 2012).

  There are many different examples of diversion interventions, such as restorative justice programs (including victim–offender mediation or family group conferencing), community service, treatment or skills-building programs (including cognitive–behavioural therapy or employment training), family treatment, drug courts, and youth courts.

  Diversion can occur at several different contact points in the juvenile justice system,     but generally youths are diverted pre- or post-charging but before the initiation of formal court procedures. Precharge diversion is generally used with lower-risk youths following their contact with the police. With precharge diversion, youths are diverted from the system with no further processing by law enforcement or court services. Postcharge diversion occurs when youths have been charged with an offense by the police or prosecution. Youths must accept responsibility for their actions and agree to participate in recommended programming. If they do, there is no further judicial processing and successful completion of diversion programming may result in dismissal of charges (Wilson and Hoge 2012).

  Link:.Programs.pdfwww.ojjdp.gov/mpg/litrevieës/Diversion.last visited on 18.08.2017

• Legislative material

  The analysis of the Justice System in Albania, June 2015, drafted by the Group of Experts of the High Level attached to the Special Parliamentary Commission on the Reform in the Justice System

  http://www.reformanedrejtesi.al/analiza-e-sistemit-te-drejtesise-ne-shqiperi-2015;

   

  Report dated 28.03.2017 on the draft-law “Code of Criminal Justice for Children in the Republic of Albania”

  http://www.reformanedrejtesi.al/sites/default/files/relacioni-1.pdf ;

   

  Decision of Assembly No.97/2016 packet of 27 draft-laws. http://www.reformanedrejtesi.al/sites/default/files/relacioni-1.pdf , 20 November 1989;

   

  Minutes, dated March 27-28 of the Commission of Juridical Matters, for the review and the adoption of the draft-law “Code of Criminal Justice for Children in the Republic of Albania” “http://www.reformanedrejtesi.al/sites/default/files/procesverbal_date_24.06.2016_0.pdf.

• Related articles

  Constitution: article 27 paragraph 2 letter “ç”, article 54 paragraph 1, paragraph 3 and paragraph 4, article 30, article 31; 

  Criminal Code of Republic of Albania article 12, article 52, article 46; 

  Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Albania, article 58, 290, 291 and 328; 

  Law No. 18/2017 “On the rights and the protection of the child” Article 3.

• Sublegal acts
  No Comment
• Decisions
  No Comment
• Literature

  Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

  Link:  Programs.pdfwww.ojjdp.gov/mpg/litreviews/Diversion 

  Justice System Analysis

  “http://www.reformanedrejtesi.al/sites/default/files/procesverbal_date_24.06.2016_0.pdf 

  Linku: https://www.unicef.org/tdad/councilofeuropejjrec08(1).pdf 

  RECOMMENDATION No. R (87) 20 OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS TO MEMBER STATES ON SOCIAL REACTIONS TO JUVENILE DELINQUENCY

  http://archivio.transnazionalita.isfol.it/file/CoE_Rec_R87-20%20Eng.pdf 

  Recommendation CM/Rec 2008 (11) of the Committee of Ministers of the member states on the European Rules for the child convicts

  http://archivio.transnazionalita.isfol.it/file/CoE_Rec_R2008-11%20Eng.pdf 

  TRAINING MANUAL FOR THE PROFESSIONALS WHO WORK WITH THE CHILDREN IN THE PENITENTIARY SYSTEM

• Archive
  No Comment