Diversionary Measures in Juvenile Justice: A Comparative Juridical Analysis of Special

Abstract

The Juvenile and Family Court and Juvenile and Family Court Procedure Act B.E. 2553 (2010) in Thailand has two major limitations: (1) families only play a limited role as informants, and state officials have ultimate authority in decisions; and (2) the mandatory consent requirements in Articles 86 and 90 make it difficult for young people to participate in corrective rehabilitation procedures. Family Group Conferences ( FGCs) , which are a familycentred approach in New Zealand's system, provide families (whānau) the authority to establish their own plans without requiring victim consent; however, victims are encouraged to be involved. By contrast, Japan's system emphasises youth accountability by integrating traditional approaches to mediation with official family court proceedings. By comparison, the research suggests reforming the Thai system by applying the principles of family empowerment, through changing the role of officials from planners to facilitators, and replacing absolute consent conditions with restorative mediation processes between offenders and victims. Such reforms would make the Thai juvenile justice system more effective and achieve real rehabilitation goals.