The current age of criminal responsibility in Australia poses large-scale problems that conflict with the interests of child protection. Raising the criminal age of responsibility and eliminating doli incapax would result in a significant reduction in juvenile detention and create a significantly more just and reasonable system for children facing the consequences of their actions. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essayThe age of criminal responsibility in Australia is 10 years. However, the idea of ​​doli incapax refers to the legal presumption that a child under the age of 14 but over the age of 10 is incapable of forming criminal intent, being the intention or knowledge of a crime. Therefore, without the intent to commit a crime, the young person should not be prosecuted for a criminal offense. As a rebuttable presumption in law, to prosecute a child over the age of 10 but under the age of 14, the child must be unquestionably aware that he or she had "malicious intent" or "culpable knowledge that he or she was doing wrong ". In addition to proving that the child committed the crime, the prosecution must also prove that the child was aware that his or her actions were wrong. For example, threatening the victim before or during the criminal act can be used to prove that the child is criminally aware of their actions. On the other hand, insight into the child's home life, education, and general well-being usually shows reasoning and explanation for the actions displayed. Doli Incapax was put in place to limit the detention of minors which is so widespread in Australia. According to Bering et al., “locking up these children during these crucial years affects their development,” highlighting the impact of incarcerating children when they are young. Incarceration can harm their development into adulthood and should be limited to reduce the risk of recidivism. This could be because the prefrontal cortex of a child's brain is not yet fully developed, leading to impaired rational thinking. The High Court also criticized the doli incapax approach, saying it is “likely to suggest that children mature at a uniform rate”. Australia follows the United Kingdom in its approach to dealing with criminal activity committed by children. The idea of ​​doli incapax clearly indicates that the likelihood of a child under 14 being criminally responsible is limited. Doli incapax has many flaws and abolishing this legal presumption as well as raising the age of criminal responsibility would create a fairer system. Australia would also follow the advice of the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, which continues to criticize Australia and other countries that have not yet raised the age of criminal responsibility to 14. The current age of criminal responsibility has harmful effects. on the future success of children who have committed crimes. When children are exposed to the criminal justice system at a young age, they are less likely to “grow out of crime,” and the adverse social response is more likely to draw these children back into a pattern and cycle of crime and potentially serve any further. a prison sentence. In most cases, the criminal offense begins as a minor offense but can later escalate into a more serious criminal act. However, as the level of maturity increases, we see that the behaviors that placed these young people in detention centers are periodic and that the 12.