A study published by the Police University College asks whether alternatives could be found to arresting and remanding a child suspected of a criminal offence. This could be achieved by making the legislation on travel bans more consistent.

Travel ban and electronically monitored travel ban should be alternatives to arrest and remand, especially in the case of children, but the complex regulatory framework complicates the use of these coercive measures. This is revealed by a legal dogmatic study published by the Police University College.

“When a child is suspected of a criminal offence, situations may arise during the pre-trial investigation that are not in the best interests of the child. Deprivation of liberty must be a measure used as a last resort, but the head of investigation, for example, may have to demand that the child be remanded because the police do not have the authority to decide on an electronically monitored travel ban. While waiting for the court hearing, the child may therefore have to spend an extra night in a police prison,” says Senior Detective Superintendent Marko Forss, the doctoral researcher who conducted the study.

Another significant challenge is the coordination of the work of the police and the social welfare authorities in a situation where coercive measures are used against a minor.

“In the case of a child, it is often necessary to weigh the impact of the child welfare process on the use of coercive measures, but the legislator has not really provided any tools for this,” Marko Forss says.

More consistent regulation that takes into account the role of the social welfare authorities and custodians in more detail would facilitate and harmonize the work of the authorities working with a child suspected of a criminal offence and ensure the realization of the rights of the child in the process.

The publication “Travel Ban and Electronically Monitored Travel Ban as Alternatives to the Arrest and Remand of a Child in Pre-Trial Investigation” is intended especially for police officers serving as the head of investigation in a pre-trial investigation, as well as prosecutors and courts. The publication also benefits social welfare authorities, for example, who participate in the use of coercive measures in their own role.