265, p. 1. Criminal Code Act (NT) s 38(1). 39 Criminal Code Act (NT) s 38(2). 40 R v F; ex parte Attorney-General [1998] QCA 097; [1999] 2 Qd.R. 157; R v CRH (Unreported, NSW Court of Criminal Appeal, Smart, Hidden and Newman JJ, 18 December 1996). 41 Exh.005.002, Convention on the Right of the Child, 20 November 1989, tendered 11October 2016, art 40(3) (a). 42 Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No 10: Children’s rights in juvenile justice, 44th sess, UN Doc CRC/C/ GC/10 (25 April 2007), para. 32. 43 Exh.006.002, Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice ( ‘Beijing Rules’), 29 November 1985, tendered, 11 October 206, rule 4. 44 Child Rights International Network, 2017, Minimum ages of criminal responsibility in Europe, Child Rights International Network website, accessed 31 October 2017, . 45 Hazel, N, 2008, Cross-national comparison of youth justice, Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, p. 32, accessed 31 October 2017, . 46 Grzywa-Holten, J, Horsfield, P, Parosanu & Pruin, I, 2015, ‘Country reports (snap shots), in A, parosanu, I, Pruin, J Grzywa-Holten & P, Horsfield (eds.), Alternatives to custody for young offenders and the influence of foster care in the European Juvenile Justice, p. 94, accessed 30 October 2017, . 47 European Union, 2014, Study on children’s involvement in judicial proceedings: Contextual overview for the criminal justice phase – Austria, report prepared by J Behrens, Luxembourg, p. 15. 48 Hazel, N, 2008, Cross-national comparison of youth justice, Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, p. 32, accessed 31 October 2017, < http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/7996/1/Cross_national_final.pdf>. 49 Grzywa-Holten, J, Horsfield, P, Parosanu & Pruin, I, 2015, ‘Country reports (snap shots), in A, parosanu, I, Pruin, J Grzywa-Holten & P, Horsfield (eds.), Alternatives to custody for young offenders and the influence of foster care in the European Juvenile Justice,p. 155, accessed 30 October 2017, . 50 Hazel, N, 2008, Cross-national comparison of youth justice, Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, p. 32, accessed 31 October 2017, . 51 Hazel, N, 2008, Cross-national comparison of youth justice, Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, p. 32, accessed 31 October 2017, . 52 Mitchell, M, Children’s Rights Report 2016. Australian Human Rights Commission (2016),p.164,189-190. 53 Submission, Australian Red Cross, 20 December 2016, p.10; Submission, Comparative Youth Penalty Project, April 2017, p. 4; Submission, Human Rights Law Centre, 28 October 2016; Submission, Jesuit Social Services, 28 October 2016; Submission, Central Australia Aboriginal Congress, 1 November 2016; Exh.052.001, Statement of Russell Goldflam, 24 November 2016, tendered 13 December 2016, para. 47. 54 Hazel, N, 2008, Cross-national comparison of youth justice, Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, p. 34, accessed 31 October 2017, . See Chapter 26 (Other youth justice and youth detention models) heading International examples of minimum age limits on sentenced detention. 55 Hespel, S & Put,2014, Alternatives to custody for young offenders: National report on juvenile justice trends – Belgium, International Juvenile Justice Observatory, p. 3. 56 Grzywa-Holten, J, Horsfield, P, Parosanu & Pruin, I, 2015, ‘Country reports (snap shots), in A, parosanu, I, Pruin, J Grzywa-Holten & P, Horsfield (eds.), Alternatives to custody for young offenders and the influence of foster care in the European Juvenile Justice,pp. 150151, accessed 30 October 2017, . 57 Ch.ch, ‘What are the penalties for juvenile crime?’, The Swiss Authorities online, accessed 31 October 2017, . 58 Ch.ch, ‘What are the penalties for juvenile crime?’, The Swiss Authorities online, accessed 31 October 2017, , 59 Child Rights International Network, 2017, Minimum ages of criminal responsibility in Europe, Child Rights International Network, accessed 31 October 2017, . 60 Grzywa-Holten, J, Horsfield, P, Parosanu & Pruin, I, 2015, ‘Country reports (snap shots), in A, parosanu, I, Pruin, J Grzywa-Holten & P, Horsfield (eds.), Alternatives to custody for young offenders and the influence of foster care in the European Juvenile Justice,pp. 150151, accessed 30 October 2017, . 61 Grzywa-Holten, J, Horsfield, P, Parosanu & Pruin, I, 2015, ‘Country reports (snap shots), in A, parosanu, I, Pruin, J Grzywa-Holten & P, Horsfield (eds.), Alternatives to custody for young offenders and the influence of foster care in the European Juvenile Justice,p. 151, accessed 30 October 2017, . 62 Grzywa-Holten, J, Horsfield, P, Parosanu & Pruin, I, 2015, ‘Country reports (snap shots), in A, parosanu, I, Pruin, J Grzywa-Holten & P, Horsfield (eds.), Alternatives to custody for young offenders and the influence of foster care in the European Juvenile Justice,p. 150, accessed 30 October 2017,