A major shift in Luxembourg's approach to young people who commit offences is underway, with the government aiming to clearly distinguish between youth protection and youth criminal law.
The reforms seek not only to clarify how minors responsible for criminal acts are dealt with, but also to ensure better support for those who are victims or require assistance.
After a year-long wait for the Council of State's opinions on the draft laws, the high advisory body has now issued several formal objections, particularly highlighting legal uncertainties.
Three legislative proposals were first submitted by the previous government four years ago. At the time, the Council of State raised substantial concerns. Ministers Élisabeth Margue and Claude Meisch amended the texts last year, but the latest versions have still drawn formal objections from the Council of State.
The legislative package encompasses three separate bills: one covering youth criminal law, a second focusing on youth protection, and a third for the protection of minors who are witnesses or victims of crime.
Until now, Luxembourg has not had a dedicated youth criminal law, but draft law 7991 is intended to change this.
Under the proposed reform, minors aged 13 and above could be held criminally responsible, but the approach would be pedagogical, as young people who show insight and cooperate could receive alternatives to traditional sentences.
However, the Council of State identified several shortcomings. The most significant is that, in some situations, minors would be able to waive their right to legal counsel. In the Council's view, legal representation should be mandatory, as minors are by definition considered vulnerable.
It also called for better training for professionals working in the youth justice system. The Council also raised issues concerning the sharing and access of data, especially by police and the Ministry of Family Affairs, and called for stronger legal safeguards.
Furthermore, it criticised the lack of clear rules to govern interactions between different actors in the justice system and institutions such as the National Office for Children.
In total, the Council of State issued six formal objections to the youth criminal law proposal, meaning the government must further revise the text.
Draft law 7994 aims to fully separate the penal dimension from the protection of minors. Here, the National Office for Children is to become the central institution overseeing both voluntary measures and legal proceedings involving minors.
Yet, this draft also attracted a series of formal objections from the Council of State, including concerns about legal uncertainties related to parental authority. The draft law would allow some closed hearings before the youth judge, which the Council finds problematic.
In its opinion, such hearings should remain public as a rule, with closed-door sessions allowed only in exceptional circumstances.
The Council of State also urged clearer definition of the functions and responsibilities of the National Office for Children. Overall, it recommended that the government make the legal text more precise and comprehensible.
The government must now amend the draft laws in response to the Council's objections.
The same applies to draft law 7992, which concerns protections for minors who are witnesses or victims of crime. Here, too, the Council identified a number of formal objections focused on legal ambiguities and terms considered too vague.
Given the complexity of these reforms, especially as they concern minor, the Council of State's opinions highlight the importance of establishing sufficient legal clarity before the laws can be enacted.
