CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ THE COURT OF PEERS LOST IN TIME According to the provision, the Court of Peers does not have to expressly acknowledge the wrongfulness of the child’s deed. The court deprives ( sąd pozbawia ) the child of their rights. The provision does not specify the rights that they may not exercise. First and foremost, the child’s right to summon other children or educators to court and the right to be a judge is affected. The waiver is temporary, only for a week. The week gives the child sufficient time to think about the misconduct. Seven days is the period offered by the court to enable the wrongdoer to change. Section 800 entirely relies on the child’s self-development. Whereas, according to section 900, 41 the court lost hope of an innermost change in the child. The community of children ceases to trust the sinner. Peers fear the child’s persisting bad conduct, perilous to mutual relationships. The orphanage community assumes the child needs to be isolated. The wrongdoer is expelled from the dormitory if no child or educator is willing to be their guardian comes forward within two days. If a guardian is found, the wrongdoer may remain in the children’s home. The guardian accepts the responsibility for the child. Each action of the child is attributed to the guardian; it is directly linked to this person. The guardian’s trust in the child’s change is the precondition of the assumed responsibility. Otherwise, the institute of guardianship has no educational purpose. Section 1000 provides for the unconditional expulsion of the child from the dormitory. 42 The conduct of the wrongdoer is intolerable and irreparable for the community in the dormitory. Yet expulsion cannot be considered an absolute, irrevocable judgment of the Court of Peers. The expelled child has the right to apply for re-admission after a period of three months. This right does not substantiate any obligation for the staff of the home to accept the child back. The staff examine the child’s return based on the personal and external circumstances of the case. The return of the sinner depends on reconciliation and their personal change. If it were not possible to restore the normality of coexistence and friendly relations between the children, the judgment would go against reason, wisdom, and collective experience. 4. The Court The dormitory is a communal place of life for the children. The formal (not informal) social norms form the coexistence there. Life in the dormitory should be guided by the normative order that has no legal character. The court applied social norms exclusively. This normative order, consisting of non-legal standards, designed to mould children’s conduct, was drafted by the Court Council even though the term “Code” or “code of law” was officially used in the dormitory. The Court is recognizably a morally-educated institution. As an institution of self- government, it should lead children to the understanding of primary values such as justice or equality. The Court of Peers is not the embodiment of justice, but its judges must seek justice. Children should learn about justice among themselves; to gain a sense of justice through their own personal experience. The court does not embody the truth. 43 It provides a living 41 Ibidem : “Sąd szuka dla a opiekuna. O ile opiekun nie znajdzie się w ciągu dwóch dni, a będzie wydalony. Wyrok ogłasza się w gazecie.” 42 Ibidem : “Sąd wydala a z zakładu. Wyrok ogłasza się w gazecie.” 43 Ibidem , p. 174: “Sąd nie jest sprawiedliwością, ale do sprawiedliwości dążyć powinien, sąd nie jest prawdą, ale pragnie prawdy.”

177