The newly elected Country Liberal Party government in Australia’s Northern Territory (NT) has lowered the age of criminal responsibility back to 10 years old. This decision reverses a short-lived reform that had raised the minimum age to 12 in line with growing pressure to match international standards. Despite protests from human rights organizations, medical experts, and Indigenous advocacy groups, the NT government asserts the change is necessary to curb rising youth crime.
This decision places the NT at odds with global trends and recommendations from international bodies like the United Nations, which advocate for a minimum criminal responsibility age of at least 14. As discussions continue around youth justice reform across Australia, the NT’s latest move raises questions about the balance between crime control, child welfare, and Indigenous rights.
Last year, the NT made headlines when it became the first Australian jurisdiction to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 12. This was seen as a step toward addressing the disproportionate incarceration rates of Aboriginal children in the NT and aligning with global human rights standards. However, following a decisive election victory in August, the newly elected government under Chief Minister Lia Finocchiaro has swiftly reversed that decision, reinstating the minimum age at 10.
The government has defended its move as a critical part of its crime reduction strategy, framing the policy as a means of early intervention. According to Finocchiaro, lowering the age of criminal responsibility will allow courts to “intervene” in the lives of young offenders, providing them with access to programs aimed at tackling the root causes of their criminal behavior.
“We took to the election a very clear plan around lowering the age of criminal responsibility so that we can capture these young people early, work out what’s going on, and turn their life around,” Finocchiaro said on Monday. She further argued that the policy would ensure the safety of the NT community, stating, “We make no apologies for delivering on our election commitment to make the territory safe.”
The government’s position is that earlier intervention in children’s lives will divert them from future crime, but critics argue that the evidence does not support this claim. Many believe the policy will instead exacerbate existing issues, particularly for the NT’s Indigenous population, who are already disproportionately affected by the criminal justice system.
One of the most striking aspects of the NT’s youth justice system is the overrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in custody. Currently, the NT incarcerates children at a rate 11 times higher than any other jurisdiction in Australia, with almost all of the detained children being Indigenous. Experts and advocates warn that lowering the age of criminal responsibility will further entrench this disparity.
The NT’s Children’s Commissioner, Shahleena Musk, a Larrakia woman from Darwin, described the NT’s youth justice system as marked by “structural racism.” She highlighted how Aboriginal children are less likely to receive cautions and more likely to be charged, pursued through the courts, and held on remand than their non-Indigenous peers.
“I accept that people are fearful in our communities, and crime has been quite prominent in the media and social media,” Musk acknowledged. “But if we rely on the evidence and start to work to address the root causes of crime, we’re going to have less of these kids reoffending. We shouldn’t be seeing these kids going into a youth justice system which is harmful, ineffective, and only compounds the very issues we’re trying to change.”
The overrepresentation of Indigenous children in detention is a long-standing issue across Australia, but the NT’s figures are particularly stark. Indigenous leaders and advocates worry that these laws will only widen the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous children in the justice system.
A growing body of research shows that criminalizing children at such a young age does not reduce crime rates. Instead, it often leads to a cycle of reoffending, with children who are jailed early more likely to end up in adult prisons later in life. The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), in a report released earlier this year, emphasized that policy should be driven by evidence, not “populist ‘tough on crime’ rhetoric.”
The AHRC report outlined the detrimental impacts of incarcerating children, including long-term harm to their mental health, education, and employment prospects. The report urged governments to redirect the resources currently spent on incarcerating children into early intervention programs, family support services, and mental health care — approaches proven to reduce youth crime without the damaging effects of imprisonment.
International human rights bodies like the United Nations have also been vocal in calling for the age of criminal responsibility to be raised to at least 14. They argue that holding children criminally accountable at younger ages is inconsistent with their cognitive development and capacity to fully understand the consequences of their actions.
Despite this, the NT government remains firm in its belief that lowering the age will help tackle the rising crime rates seen in areas like Alice Springs, where a string of violent incidents this year led to the implementation of youth curfews.
Chief Minister Finocchiaro’s government insists that it has a clear mandate to make these changes, pointing to the strong support it received during the August election. The Country Liberal Party campaigned heavily on being “tough on crime,” appealing to widespread concerns about youth crime in the NT. Many communities, particularly in Alice Springs, have reported feeling unsafe and have called for more stringent measures to address crime.
The government has also introduced other measures aimed at tackling youth crime, including tightening bail laws. According to Finocchiaro, these actions are necessary to restore public safety, a key promise made during the election campaign.
“We make no apologies for delivering on our election commitment to make the territory safe,” she said.
However, the emphasis on “tough on crime” rhetoric has drawn criticism from human rights advocates, who argue that fear and populism are driving policy decisions at the expense of vulnerable children’s futures.
The decision to lower the age of criminal responsibility has sparked widespread protests, with over 100 people gathering outside the NT Parliament as the bill was debated. Protesters carried placards with messages like “10-year-olds still have baby teeth” and “What if it was your child?” The protestors represent a broad coalition of concerned citizens, human rights organizations, medical experts, and Indigenous advocacy groups.
Doctors and psychologists have expressed particular concern about the impacts of criminalizing young children. Research shows that early involvement in the criminal justice system can have severe effects on children’s development, often resulting in mental health issues, interrupted education, and lifelong stigma.
The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists has strongly opposed the NT government’s decision, citing research that shows children under 14 are not developmentally mature enough to fully comprehend the consequences of their actions. They argue that criminalization at such a young age is harmful and ineffective.
The NT’s decision has significant implications for the broader debate around youth justice reform in Australia. While the NT has lowered the age of criminal responsibility, other states and territories are moving in the opposite direction. The Australian Capital Territory (ACT) has already raised the minimum age to 14, and Victoria is set to implement similar reforms next year. Tasmania has committed to raising the age to 14 by 2029.
Advocates fear that the NT’s reversal could stall momentum for reform in other parts of the country, where the push to raise the age of criminal responsibility has been gaining ground. They argue that Australia risks falling further behind international standards if more jurisdictions do not follow the lead of the ACT.
The decision to lower the age of criminal responsibility in the NT has sparked intense debate, not only within the territory but across the nation. On one side, the NT government insists that the move is a necessary measure to address rising crime and protect communities. On the other, human rights advocates, medical professionals, and Indigenous groups argue that the policy will harm vulnerable children, particularly Indigenous youth, and lead to long-term negative outcomes.
As Australia grapples with these conflicting perspectives, the NT’s decision raises critical questions about how to balance community safety with the rights and welfare of children. At the heart of the issue is a deeper conversation about justice, equality, and the future of Indigenous children in the NT — a conversation that Australia, it seems, is far from resolving.
