What's the Children's Rights Amendment?

You may have heard something about a proposed change to the Constitution concerning Children's Rights. A lot of people think the Constitution needs updating so children are better protected. Let's look at the issues involved.

Aren't my rights already protected by the Constitution?
Yes. But only very generally. Every citizen has rights under the Constitution. Some rights, under Article 40.3 are unenumerated. This means that they are not expressly written down in the Constitution, but you possess them all the same. These include the right to be fed, the right to shelter, etc.
Children's rights specifically are not listed in the Constitution. What the people who support changing the Constitution want for the government and the courts to promise that in decisions involving children, the best interests of those children will be the most important factor. Right now, under the Constitution, what the children's parents think is the most important factor. While this is important too, some people feel that children (especially vulnerable children, like those who are being abused) should have their voices heard the loudest.

What about what my parents think? 
What your parents think will still be very important. But the government and the courts will be able to balance your opinions and theirs, instead of just relying on what your parents think.

Here's a good example of why this is needed: There's a test that's done on newborn babies (called a PKU test) to test for a certain type of disease that can be very dangerous to children if it's not detected early. Doctors can find out if babies have this disease by taking blood from their heel with a small needle soon after they are born. A couple of years ago, the parents of a newborn baby boy (we'll call him Paul) said that it was against their religious beliefs to allow doctors to carry out this test on Paul. Paul's doctors took this case all the way to the Supreme Court (remember that's the highest court in Ireland!) The judges there said that even though Paul's parents were making a very unwise and unsafe decision (because Paul could get really sick) the court could not interfere with that decision.

If children had their own separate article in the Constitution, judges could make wiser and safer decisions for babies like Paul who are too young to have their own say.

Why would people oppose this?
Some people think that this kind of change in the Constitution would limit your parents' rights to make decisions for you. But what it would really do is allow the courts to consider your best interests aswell as what your parents think.


How can I help?
Tell everyone you know that the Government is planning a constitutional referendum to bring children's rights into the Constitution. Ask them to talk about it. Ask them to vote yes!

Class 2 - Part 3: Where Does It Come From and How Does It Work?

The last lesson in this class was on procedures within the courts: appeals, and precedence.

Appeals
Depending on the outcome of a case, one of the parties may want to appeal the decision of the court. They do this by lodging the case with the court directly above the one they just came from. You can appeal a case on two grounds.

1) Error Of Facts --> if the facts of the case were inaccurately represented; if the judge made a mistake as to what happened

2) Error Of Law --> if the judge applied the wrong law, or applied the law incorrectly, or if he gave incorrect instructions to the jury.

Is the Supreme Court the last resort? Do you know of any other options citizens may have available to them if they lose their case in the Supreme Court?
Citizens can go to the European Court of Human Rights, or the European Court of Justice, but this is a long and costly process and is normally only done in exceptional circumstances.

Precedence
Precedent is the principle in law of using the past in order to assist in current interpretation and decision making. Precedent does not dictate how a new case should be decided, but it can be very important in establishing how courts have viewed a particular law or circumstance in a legal setting.
Generally, judges will follow decisions they have previously given themselves, or decisions of a higher court. Why do you think a judge would follow the decision of a higher court? What would happen if he didn't?


The students here engaged in a debate: is precedent good? Should we decide each case on its facts, or should we presume that like cases should be treated alike. Discuss the good and bad points of precedent.

Class 2 - Part 2: Where Does It Come From and How Does It Work?

• Having discerned Who's Who In The Courts, we moved on to the courts themselves. We talked about the difference between civil and criminal cases. 

Basically; civil actions refer to actions taken by individuals against other individuals or organisations.  These kinds of cases include personal injury claims (in the case of road traffic accidents, breaches of contract etc.) The purpose of a civil claim is most often to seek compensation or recover money owed. Civil cases will be called Party A v. Party B: i.e. Coleman v. Murphy, O'Neill v. XYZ Businesses

Criminal actions are taken by the State, usually through the Director of Public Prosecutions. They generally deal with things considered wrong or illegal, such as murder, rape, theft or robbery. The aim of the criminal law trial is to punish a wrongdoing, usually through a jail sentence or a fine. In criminal cases, the DPP is usually the first party: i.e. DPP v. Lee, DPP v. Lynch

• We then moved on to the differences between the Courts in Ireland.

1. District Court

The District Court deals with civil actions where the compensation claimed is not more than €6,350. It also deals with liquor licensing cases and a wide range of family law cases, including custody and maintenance orders. In criminal matters, the District Court deals with drunk driving, speeding, assault and criminal damage. In these criminal cases, there is no jury, just a judge sitting alone. 

2. Circuit Court

The Circuit Court deals with civil actions where the claim does not exceed €38,000. It also deals with cases that relate to divorce and separation. In criminal matters, the Circuit Court sits with a judge and jury and can deal with all criminal matters except the most serious crimes (murder and rape.) The Circuit Court also hears appeals from the District Court. 

3. High Court

The High Court is based in Dublin and has the power to hear all cases but usually only hears those that cannot be dealt with by the lower courts. In civil actions, it has primary jurisdiction (hears the case for the first time) where the claim exceeds €38,000. It hears appeals from the Circuit Court in civil matters.

3(b): The Central Criminal Court

When the High Court is dealing with criminal cases, it is known as the Central Criminal Court. It tries the most serious criminal offenses, such as murder and rape, which the Circuit Court cannot deal with. A judge and jury try these cases. The Central Criminal Court has travelled to a number of venues outside Dublin including Cork, Limerick, Sligo, Waterford and Mayo.

4. The Special Criminal Court

Consists of three judges sitting without a jury and mostly deals with criminal cases involving terrorist organisations. It was established specifically to try cases relating to the IRA without juries who may be too scared to be involved in those cases. Recently, the Special Criminal Court has heard cases relating to organised crime and drug charges. This has caused a lot of controversy. Why do you think this is? It is because trial by jury is an express right provided for in the Constitution, and people are denied this right in the Special Criminal Court. 

5. The Court of Criminal Appeal

Hears appeals relation to criminal convictions or sentences from the Circuit Court, Central Criminal Court, or the Special Criminal Court.

6. The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the highest court in Ireland and hears appeals from the High Court and occasionally from the Court of Criminal Appeal. Under Article 26 of the Irish Constitution, the President of Ireland may refer a Bill that the government wants to pass to the Supreme Court, so that the judges may decide if the Bill is in accordance with the constitution. 

The students each drew a flowchart outlining the path of a case through the Irish Courts system.
A large copy of this, outlining the route of the appellate system, is included in the Let's Look At The Law resource pack.  

Class 2 - Part 1: Where Does It Come From and How Does It Work?

• The class started with the students contributing rules for the Constitution, which they decided to name The Classroom Declaration of Human Rights. It included crucial rules for our classroom, including 'No Murder.' Each student wrote a rule, then signed it, and we hung it up in the classroom every week. We enjoyed being the framers of our own constitution. (The students would frequently refer to the CDHR in the weeks coming, including making an amendment to it a few weeks in!)

The Classroom Declaration of Human Rights

• The main body of this class focused on the Courts and the various people involved in the law. The children talked about relatives they had who had different jobs in the legal profession (several of the children had parents who were solicitors or barristers.) We then went through each person involved.

A. The judge is in charge of court proceedings and decides any legal issues arising in the case. If the case does not involve a jury, the judge also decides questions of fact, such as the guilt or innocence of the accused, or which party wins in a civil action. According to the Constitution, Article 35.1, judges are appointed by the President (do you think this means the President can just pick her friends to be judges? Who would make a good judge?) however under Article 13.9 of the Constitution, the President must pick judges on the advice of the Government. Judges are chosen from barristers or solicitors who have been practising law for at least ten years.

B. The registrar sits in front of the judge and records any orders made by them. The registrar also swears in the jury and administers the oath to witnesses.

C. The stenographer is responsible for accurately recording everything that is said in court during the case, including any evidence given by the witnesses. This record is known as a transcript.

D. The witness sits to one side of the judge and gives testimony in open court.

E. The jury sits together on one side of the courtroom where jurors have a clear view of the judge and any witnesses. A jury is present in serious trials. Before 1976 only people who owned property could sit on juries but this was held to be unconstitutional (not in line with the provisions of the Constitution) and now anyone who can vote can serve on a jury. Ireland have allowed women to vote since 1922.

Certain people are not allowed to serve on juries: the President, judges or former judges, lawyers, police officers, people who cannot read, people who suffer from mental illness, people who work in forensic science laboratories (why do you think this is?)


Other people may be excused from jury duty if they meet certain criteria: members of the government, practising doctors, nurses, vets, midwives or pharmacists. (why do you think this is?) It is generally because they do a job that nobody else can do.


F. The tipstaff is a special assistant to the judge. One of their duties is to announce the arrival and departure of the judge from the courtroom.


G. At the starting point of most cases, a person must first consult a solicitor. Can you think of any reason why you would go to visit a solicitor if you haven't committed a crime, or been the victim of a crime? --> making a will.
Many solicitors do not become engaged in advocacy; that is, they do not present a case before a judge. In general, they instruct a barrister to appear in court. They prepare all the papers for a case and handle all the correspondence between their client and the other person in the case. They also obtain reports from expert witnesses, like doctors and engineers. The solicitor also talks with the barrister in relation to what is required at court.




H. For the most part, you cannot just walk into an office and hire a barrister. Barristers will give legal advice after they have been hired by a solicitor. They are usually referred to as Counsel (have you ever heard somebody say 'Counsel for the Defence?') The barrister's role is to argue the client's case, by asking questions of witnesses and examining their evidence.  

I. The Gardaí. Investigations into crime, both minor and serious, are carried out by the Gardaí. In major cases, the offences are investigated by the Gardaí and their files on the case are then sent on to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who determines whether or not there should be a court case.

I printed off this document for the class, available from www.courts.ie

Useful Information

Something I didn't discover until week 2 of this class was the amazing resources provided for free from The Courts Service (www.courts.ie) This website provides interesting statistics, explanations and links to other legal websites.

• Go to www.courts.ie, choose English, and then look at the bottom right for a section entitled 'Schools'

The best resource however is the Let's Look At The Law Teaching and Resource Pack. Designed for secondary school students, this pack contains lesson plans, dvds, scripts for Mock Trials and posters detailing the hierarchy of courts and sources of law.

It's available for free from the Courts Service.

Write to: The Courts Service Information Office,
                Phoenix House, 15/24 Phoenix Street North
                Smithfield, Dublin 7
Telephone: +353 1 888 6459
Email: publicationsunit@courts.ie

This is a definitely recommended resource, and can be mailed out in a fortnight. 

Class 1 - Part 2: Irish History Lesson

We talked about the different kind of laws that exist, and discussed which ones the class were most interested in. We came up with criminal, human rights, tort "suing people!!", environmental law. Then we discussed the 'basic rules' that exist for citizens, to be found in the Constitution. I wanted to explain the development of the Irish Legal system, starting back in the 12th Century with Brehon Laws and working all the way up to the drafting of the Constitution, in order for the class to realise how important it is that we have the power to make our own laws.

I wasn't really able to find a fun way of doing this, so I just tried to make it short and snappy, while inviting commentary from the class, asking questions (based on what they would have known from the national school curriculum) and telling funny or shocking stories. There is definitely room for improvement in this lesson. Consider a cartoon or a video, or even allowing each student to read rather than the teacher reading. Below, find a slideshow of the Irish History lesson. (To see the slideshow in larger form, click on view on Slideshare in the lower left corner. You'll be taken to slideshare.com and you should be able to see it there.)

At the end of the history lesson, we talked about the importance of rules in society, and decided to make a classroom constitution. I asked every student to come up with a rule for class which, at the beginning of the next lesson, they could inscribe onto our classroom constitution. 

Irish History Lesson - Slideshow

Irish History Lesson

View more presentations from amymariacoleman

Crazy Old Laws

The Legal World’s A Crazy One

1) Up until 1991, a popular past-time in France was to throw dwarves/little people who would be covered in Velcro protective material against a wall. The person who threw the dwarf the furthest would win a prize. This was a popular outing for families.

2) In 1292, there was a court case concerning the ownership of an ox. Two men were fighting saying that they both owned the ox. The court decided that the men should fight in order to establish ownership. The men were to fight to the death or until nightfall. If the accuser (the person who had initiated the court case) was still standing at nightfall, he was said to be lying.

3) In 1519, there was a case concerning damage to crops by moles. The judge issued an order for the moles in question to come to court to answer charges and of course they did not, so they were sent into exile.

4) In 1960, a 65 year old lady was found guilty of claiming £2 a week pension for a friend of hers who had died 21 years earlier.

5) In 1998, a man after having a few too many drinks decided to get a taxi home. He realised he was unable to pay the fare as he had no more money, so the taxi driver kicked him out of the taxi. He decided to turn himself into the police so the taxi driver would not have to. When he arrived at the station, he found it locked up and decided he would break in so he could leave a statement. While he was there, he decided to put on a garda uniform and wait until morning so he could protect the station in case anyone else decided to do what he had done. In the morning the Sergeant arrived to open up and was greeted by the man. He was promptly arrested and charged for impersonating a police officer. The whole court was in fits of laughter, even the judge, who left the man go without conviction.

6) According to a law of 1324,  the head of any dead whale found on the coast of Britain automatically becomes the property of the King of Britain, and the tale becomes the property of the queen.

7) A law in Arizona in the US states that it is illegal to smile unless you are missing one tooth. The only people who are allowed a full-toothed smile are children.

8) It is illegal for Trinity College students to walk across campus without swords

9) The youngest ever American citizen sentenced to life imprisonment was 14 years old. (Lionel Tate, sentenced for the murder of a six year old girl

10) In New York, a person may not walk around with an icecream in their pocket if it is Sunday.

Class 1 - Part 1: What Are We Doing Here?

I wanted the first class to be very informal - just a way for my Teaching Assistant (Sally) and I to get to know the students. When they arrived, we had the chairs arranged in a circle, and each student took a place. We played a few name games - 'My name is Amy and I'm amazing, my name is Ben and I'm brilliant,' to start off. We worked out which students were the same age, who had to travel the furthest every weekend. This took up about the first forty-five minutes of class, but was definitely worth it to get the students comfortable with each other, and with us.

For the very first lesson, I read out 10 laws / legal scenarios, and had the students vote on which were potentially true or not. (See document in next post for full list!) Most of these were very bizarre ("It is illegal for students of Trinity College Dublin to walk across campus without swords.") but all totally true. The students picked about 50/50 true/false and were shocked when I revealed them all to be true.

This led to a group discussion on why it's important to study law --> mainly because if we were still following these rules, we would be carrying swords across college campuses and throwing dwarves against walls (Until 1991, a popular past-time in France was to throw dwarves covered in Velcro against a wall. Whoever threw their dwarf the furthest would win a prize.)

At this point, I asked the students what they knew about law, as opposed to laws, and how they could define it. A lot of answers were based on things being right and obeying the law. A good catch-all description from Byrne &McCutcheon is

- "that which governs human behaviour either by prohibiting identified forms of conduct or by attaching particular consequences to specified forms of behaviour."

Put simply for 8-12 year olds: making laws we have to adhere to and giving appropriate punishments to those who break them.

What would happen, then, if we didn't have law? Essentially, there would be anarchy. The students mostly understood what anarchy was, "It's when everything is crazy and people go around stealing things from shops." A good umbrella description is "...a state where there is no government and where each individual has absolute liberty."

Imagine what would happen if everyone could do what they want? Ask the students what exactly would be wrong with anarchy, and to think of some examples where it is completely essential that we have law (and people to enforce it.)
Some good examples:

• speed limits
• seatbelt laws
• drink-driving
• litter laws

After this we talked a little bit about why the law needs to exist. We talked about the idea of deterrence, that the law exists to make sure people don't break it - kind of like a circle idea. 

We talked about whether law should be taught in schools, and I introduced the concept of ignorant juris non excusat. This translates as: ignorance of the law is no excuse. Therefore, if you didn't know that murder was against the law, and you killed somebody, you would still be liable for any punishment. We discussed whether or not this was a good idea. The students had some good points - it's easier then for smarter people to stay out of trouble; if we didn't have this rule then maybe anarchy would develop as everybody would pretend they didn't know certain laws existed.

Pre-Class Preparation

Pre-Class Preparation

As a brief outline – this is an 8 week course for 8-12 year olds, designed to be a basic education into law and order, specifically within the Irish legal system. The classes take place on Saturday mornings, for two and a half hours, with a fifteen minute break in the middle.

I was nervous, flattered, excited and terrified at the prospect of teaching a class, especially to gifted children. A little contextual information first.

Pupils who are exceptionally able or talented are those who have demonstrated their capacity to achieve

high performance in one or more of the following areas:

(a) General intellectual ability;

(b) Specific academic aptitude;

(c) Creative or productive thinking;

(d) Leadership ability;

(e) Visual and performing arts;

(f) Mechanical aptitude;

(g) Psychomotor ability, e.g. in athletics, gymnastics.

(from Department of Education and Science (1993) Report of the Special Education Review Committee

Available from Government Publications 01-6476834 €12.70 Catalogue No. E/109)

Gifted education has proven to be a contentious topic. It’s difficult to define whose child is ‘gifted’ and whose isn’t, but the majority of research suggests it’s children who fall into the top 5% of the population in a given area qualify for additional support. The Special Educational Support Service (SESS) suggests that there are 23,000 exceptionally able children in Ireland (population roughly 4.4 million.)

Tips for teachers of exceptionally able children include: giving the student different material than his/her peers, establish special classes for gifted children, avoidance of repetitive work, encouraging open-ended project work. I didn’t encounter much need for specialised lesson plans for students in a morning class, although some students were naturally much more willing to contribute to the class.

Over the summer from June-August, I received course outlines from previous instructors. These ranged from the incredibly sparse to the incredibly detailed. I also conducted some small initial research on the internet, including some articles on the importance of teaching law to children.

http://robfrankel.blogspot.com/2004/12/teaching-law-to-school-kids.html

“Even the youngest kids have tiny moral compasses. We should be there to assure they're accurately set from the first day of school.”

.

I started really planning for this class at the beginning of September. At this point, I didn’t have a fixed syllabus for the class, beyond knowing that the first class would discuss law and order as concepts, and evolve into a lesson on the history of law, ending in 1937 with the drawing up of the Irish constitution. My main resource was The Irish Legal System, (Byrne and McCutcheon, Butterworths: 1996.) In particular, the first two chapters - Introduction To The Legal System and Development of the Irish Legal System – provided much of the information on which I planned to base my first two classes. The information is concise, accurate, and written in language that is not too difficult to comprehend. Byrne and McCutcheon would be my starting point for each of the topics I taught in the following weeks.

Course Outline

Law and Order Course Outline

Week 1: History and the Constitution

- start with name games for the students to get to know instructor, TA and each other

- Read out a list of 10 bizarre laws (all true) dating from 1200s to recently. Ask the class as we go to jot down whether they think these are true or false. Use this to open a discussion on why we need to keep studying law, as distinct from following old statutes.

- Open discussion on anarchy -> why exactly do we need the law? What would we have if we didn’t have it?

- History of Irish Law. Dating from Brehon Law to 1922 and independence.

- Introduce the Constitution, ask the class why it is important based on what we just studied.

- Draw up a classroom constitution. Get the class to come up with class guidelines (funny or serious) and spend the last half an hour colouring it in.

Week 2: Where does it come from and how does it work?

- Introduce the different personalities involved in the legal system (Judges, Lawyers, Court Officials etc.) Discuss these with the class. Watch description of court video from courts.ie and hand out illustrated chart that the class can follow along as they watch the video.

- Discuss the Court System in Ireland, tracing the path of a decision from the district court up to the Supreme Court. Explain doctrine of precedent. Discuss how cases can go to Europe. Have the class draw a flow chart following a case. Have the class participate in a discussion about the value of precedence. Why is it important that we choose not to decide every particular case on its merits. Mention the case of Hill v. Metropolitan Police.

- Ask the class what they know about the government. Discuss the passage of a bill through parliament. Use this to introduce topic of separation of powers.

- Briefly discuss the sources of law – natural law (Case of the Speluncean Explorers), EU Law, statute, custom.

Week 3: Catch a Criminal

- focus on criminal law

- Introduce the actus reus and mens rea of a crime.

- Discuss murder/manslaughter.

- Focus on evidence law. Have the class engage in a debate on whether we should admit evidence from a) children b) the mentally impaired c) husband or wives of accused people.

- Talk about the Nally case – self-defence and the bias of juries.

- Criminology. Set up a scene (ie. Train station) where there are lots of possible opportunities to commit crimes. No windows in waiting rooms, broken video cameras, very poor lighting. Have the class come up with ways to improve crime prevention.

- Talk about sentencing. Hand out a statue (the class will know what a statute is from their discussion on sources of law from last week.) Introduce the concepts of proportionality and deterrence. Have the class read through a statute (Offences Against the State Act) and outline the different times of punishments available.

Week 4: Tort-urous

- Introduce the difference between criminal and civil law. Have the class act out different scenarios in order for the others to guess whether they are civil or criminal acts.

- Focus on Tort Law – defamation, libel and slander. Invite the class to comment on the concept of damages. Is money a good enough reward?

- Discussion on the ‘Compo Culture’ we have found ourselves in. Discuss cases of nervous shock-where if somebody sees a car accident, they can claim for personal damages.

Week 5: Focus on Family

- ­Family Law. Children and the Law.

- Focus on education. Sinnott v. Minister for Education. Are you an entirely different person at 18 than you were at 17 and 365 days. Class discussion on when childhood stops.

- UN Charter on Rights of the Child. Have the class draw up a list of human rights for children first, and then later show them the actual declaration. Incite discussion as to why we needed this charter in the first place.

- Role of children in the state. How are they protected? Work on the proposed Constitutional Amendement for Children.

Week 6: Human Rights and Wrongs

- Focus on European Charter of Human Rights. A lot of this will relate back to the work we did on the family and children the previous week. Talk about how Irish Law interacts with European Law.

- Introduce some elements of contract law – basic principles of offer and acceptance. Talk about Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball case, arguably most famous contract case.

- Have the class discuss a fictional scenario. Roleplay where one side sells the other a faulty product. What kind of contract exists between the two.

Week 7 & 8:

- There will be considerable overlap with these two weeks. We will spend them both preparing and undergoing the mock trial. Each student will have a different role to play.

- They will also have to make a small presentation at the end, based on what topic of law they found most interesting.

Coming Soon

I’m a 22 year old Irish law student who recently completed a semester’s teaching of ‘Introduction To Legal Studies.’ What makes this interesting is that my students were 8 children aged between 9 and 12, academically bright as shiny buttons and able to argue and articulate as well as most college students!

While researching topics for this 8-week class, I found that there was not a lot of information available (both on the internet and in my college library) to support the creation of a syllabus for law for children outside the United States. With that in mind, I wanted to document my classes week-by-week in the hope that this could help out any future legal-eaglet educators. Stay tuned for more posts in the coming weeks.