Since the arrest of thousands of youths during the social unrest of 2019-20, debate has raged on how Hong Kong’s legal system should deal with young offenders . Those youngsters who took part in the unrest certainly do not deserve special treatment; society, and particularly the victims of the radicals, suffered great harm as a result of the violent protests. However, young offenders in general should be treated more leniently than adults. My arguments are threefold. First, scientific research on brain development suggests that young offenders could be regarded as less culpable. As young people’s cognitive capacity is still developing, they are less able to perceive risks, manage emotions, control impulses and evaluate the long-term consequences of their actions. Young people are also more prone to commit crimes as a form of experimentation or when pressured by peers. As a result, their culpability and the case for retribution are arguably lower. Second, imposing harsh sentences on young people is likely to be counterproductive. Rehabilitation and reform have long been recognised by the courts as legitimate sentencing factors. Young people should be given a chance ; they are more likely to benefit from a rehabilitative approach. In fact, research has shown that most offending behaviour is limited to adolescence and will naturally disappear with the transition to adulthood. Conversely, labelling young people as offenders through criminalisation and imprisonment increases their chances of reoffending, according to the United Nations’ guidelines for preventing juvenile delinquency. Third, Hong Kong should strive to comply with international standards. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which China (including Hong Kong) is a party, provides that imprisonment of children (defined as persons under 18) “shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time”. So, if we can agree that young people should be treated relatively leniently in our criminal justice system, what more should the system do? For one thing, under the Police Superintendent’s Discretion Scheme, the police could seek to caution rather than prosecute offenders below 18. The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommends that diversion measures (alternatives to prosecution) be used to deal with most child offenders, as the approach “yields good results for children, is congruent with public safety and has proved to be cost-effective”. However, according to police figures for 2021, while 1,114 young people aged 10-15 and a further 1,907 young people aged 16-20 were arrested in 2021, only 270 were discharged under the discretion scheme. Mainland China appears to be doing much better than Hong Kong in this regard. In 2021, mainland prosecutors decided not to approve the arrest of 50.4 per cent of young offenders, in most cases because the offending behaviour did not pose serious harm to society. Furthermore, among those arrested, 39.1 per cent were offered non-prosecution (some with conditions attached). The high diversion rate is consistent with the mainland’s commendable youth justice philosophy of education, reformation and rescue. Hong Kong could learn from the mainland’s experience. Unfortunately, in recent years (especially in public order offences) Hong Kong courts have emphasised that in serious cases, young age “pales into insignificance”. While a deterrent sentence could at times be justifiably imposed, not all crimes are so serious that they call for a long sentence. For some young offenders , as Mr Justice Derek Pang Wai-cheong rightly said in the case of Secretary for Justice v SWS, “rehabilitation is best achieved by losing liberty for a short term, learning to stay disciplined and living a regulated life”. Yet, it is more important that as a general rule, our youth justice system should adopt an individualistic approach and place young people’s best interests and rehabilitative needs as a primary consideration. The government is reportedly considering whether to “close” the remaining 2019 protest cases where charges have not yet been brought. Whether to prosecute or not, a decision is needed promptly so these young people can move on with their lives. A second chance for Hong Kong’s young protesters The Correctional Services Department’s successful efforts in providing post-release supervision and employment support for rehabilitated young offenders should be echoed by society. Bernard Chan’s recent article in the Post encouraging business leaders to provide employment opportunities to ex-offenders hit the right note. Supporting our young offenders’ reintegration into society would, in turn, reduce recidivism and make Hong Kong a safer and more inclusive place. Aaron Wong is an MPhil in criminology student at the University of Cambridge