CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ THE COURT OF PEERS LOST IN TIME Another circumstance is, under section 64, fear, but in such a case, the court assumes personal change in the form of gaining courage. 18 According to section 65 weakness of the body is an expected factual ground for forgiveness. 19 The court accepts the victim’s weakness and logically does not require any metamorphosis of the child. Provided that the wrongdoer has committed an act in response to previous mental or physical abuse or bullying, the court has to unconditionally forgive them. 20 According to section 67, the court forgives if the child acted thoughtlessly without being able to recognise or reflect on the subjective or objective factors of the induced situation. 21 Even regret is also a mitigating circumstance in section 71, 22 although the Code grants it a particular position outside of this separate section. The court forgives because the child is conscious of or intensely feels the wrongdoing of their own misconduct. A change of heart is an integral part of regret. Without it, regret should not be accepted by the victim. One distinct section of the Code covers situations where the Court of Peers attempts to ( sąd próbuje przebaczyć ) forgive the wrongdoer. Section 80 unequivocally governs the identical consequence. The court forgives because it holds the opinion that only goodness can lead to the change of a child. 23 The normative sentence does not hide partial uncertainty in what may be thought of as good in a particular matter. Apparently, the norm does not only refer to external, more objective goodness, but to the good that closely relates to the personal situation of the wrongdoer. Ideally, a child should not avoid accountability for their actions and should be guided by good will. Therefore, in accordance with section 81, the court attempts to deliver an exonerating judgment. 24 While under section 82 the court simply forgives because it still believes in the child’s development. The court expects a change of the child’s heart. 25 The penultimate part of the Code encompasses several exceptional cases. The court demonstrates its prominence by ruling on exceptions ( uniewinnienia wyjątkowe ). According to section 90, the court considers forgiveness when the child is unable to control themselves, although they really wish to do so. 26 Ability to control anger or outrage usually means virtue, while the wrongdoer’s loss of control over themselves could be seen as a vice. The court takes into account both the personal condition and character of the child, especially the lack of mental strength. The following provision has a connection with the understanding of the normative order without punishment. 27 The court forgives the child upon finding its lack of comprehension of this basic normative fact. Section 92 links the objective circumstance that the child will soon leave the dormitory with their inner temper. The court does not want the child to leave with bitterness. 28 The child should not have a negative feeling of pain toward the institution and the people who form it. 18 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza A, bo postąpił tak z obawy, ale chce być mężniejszy.” 19 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza A, bo jest słaby.” 20 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza A, bo postąpił tak dlatego, że mu dokuczano.” 21 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza A, bo postąpił tak przez brak zastanowienia.” 22 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza, bo a żałuje, że tak postąpił.” 23 Ibidem , p. 186: “Sąd przebacza A, bo jest zdania, że poprawić go może tylko dobroć.” 24 Ibidem : “ Sąd próbuje wydać wyrok uniewinniający.” 25 Ibidem : “ Sąd przebacza, nie tracąc nadziei, że a się poprawi.” 26 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza, zważywszy, że a tak bardzo chciał, że mu mocy nie starczyło, by się powstrzymać.” 27 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza, bo a jest u nas niedawno i nie może zrozumieć porządku bez kar.” 28 Ibidem : “Sąd przebacza, bo a niezadługo nas opuści, więc sąd nie chce, by odszedł od nas z żalem. ”

173