CHRONIC. Should we be tougher in the face of youth violence?

Clément Viktorovitch returns every week to the debates and political issues. Sunday April 28: the words of Prime Minister Gabriel Attal, who calls for a “surge of authority” in the face of news items involving youth.

Prime Minister Gabriel Attal called for a “surge of authority” in the face of youth violence. The mayor of Bézier, Robert Ménard, decided to establish a curfew for under 13s between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. But for you, such ideas could prove counterproductive. A turn of the screw on youth: this is how we could summarize the current climate. The Prime Minister wants a stricter school with disruptive students, parents more responsible for the actions of their children and harsher justice for juvenile delinquents. Announcements which follow the series of dramatic news items which have marked the news in recent weeks: the attack on Samara and the murders of Philippe, Zakaria and Shemseddine.

Faced with such news items, the question actually seems to arise: are we facing increasingly violent youth? To answer this, we must go beyond the news items, however dramatic they may be, to look at the statistics. Regarding homicides specifically, we have actually seen a slight increase in the number of victims since 2016, of around 3% per year. But the share of minors among the culprits remains stable: it is therefore not a problem specific to young people.

“A speech neither new nor scientifically supported”

On the other hand, as soon as we look at delinquency as a whole, the picture becomes clearer. Sociologist Christian Mouhanna, researcher at the CNRS, recalled this week in the newspaper The world that, in recent years, we have observed a notable drop in the number of minors convicted of crimes or misdemeanors. His words are very clear: “The discourse consisting of castigating ‘younger and more and more violent juvenile delinquents’ is neither new nor supported by scientifically proven results.”

So there isn’t something specific about the current period? No, and this is what the historian Véronique Blanchard and the historian David Niget show very well. In a column published this week, also in the newspaper The world, they show that alarmist speeches on youth delinquency have never stopped since the 19th century. In 1907, for example, the daily The small newspaper was already worried about “scourge of juvenile delinquency, ever more violent, more numerous, more precocious”. Now, precisely, why is the mayor of Bézier, Robert Ménard, establishing a curfew for those under 13? Because, according to him, there would be “younger and younger children on the street and above all more and more violent”.

“It’s been the same argument, word for word, for generations. Unfortunately, without any serious study to support it.”

Clement Viktorovich

at franceinfo

In any case, this is the conclusion reached by the researchers I have just cited. The only problem is that these calculations will not be without effects on the children themselves. Let’s come back to what the Prime Minister announced for juvenile justice. In particular, he plans to attenuate the minority excuse. Adolescents aged between 16 and 18 could therefore be judged more often as adults, they would be sent to detention more easily and for longer periods. However, last October, the Directorate for the Judicial Protection of Youth, an official body of the Ministry of Justice, issued a report on the imprisonment of minors. She believes that it is, for young people, a destructive experience, which leads to a deterioration in their lifestyle, frequent trauma, and an increase in the risk of suicide.

Conclusions shared by Unicef, the United Nations agency dedicated to child protection. For Unicef, the government project risks “undermine fundamental principles” of the rights of the child.

The effectiveness of sanctions questioned

These measures must prevent the risk of recurrence. But it is far from being the case. Journalist Richard Mendel published in December 2022 a summary of English-speaking research on the confinement of young people. He draws the same observation as in France: “The incarceration of young people harms their physical and mental health, hinders their academic and professional success, and often exposes them to abuse.” But beyond that, he was interested in the question of the recidivism of incarcerated minors. He cites a number of studies which converge in the same direction: when we lengthen the prison sentences of adolescents, we increase the risk that they will reoffend.

The reform desired by the government, to respond to this increase in youth violence, of which it has not been established that this is a reality, could therefore well have the consequence… of increasing youth violence, in addition to directly harming to their rights and integrity.