Research and data gathered by the UN Centre for International Crime Prevention. The work combines a wealth of information about crime and justice from UN member states and beyond, and presents emerging crime trends and operations of criminal justice systems on a comparative basis.

A socio-economic analysis of juvenile delinquency that is critical of society's approach to juvenile crime responds with recommendations and principles for change. Efforts to modernize the juvenile court system and the general attitude of the public sector toward youth crime are discussed. To teach the youthful offenders involvement in community life, the public and private sectors of the population must respond to youthful needs. Emphasis is placed on the following areas for changes in attitude and approach of responsible individuals - public officials, community and social agencies, teachers, and potential employers. Greatest emphasis is placed on juvenile justice system personnel ranging from the police to the judge. The Gault decision is discussed as a viable vehicle for giving perspective to future programs and priorities. That a revitalized juvenile court system is needed is a logical conclusion.

The paper deals with one of the significant aspect of fairness in criminal cases, the concept of "equality of arms". The considerations focus initially on the analysis of the scope and meaning of the notion of "equality of arms" in the case-law of the European Commission and the European Court of Human Rights under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The author reviewed the Strasbourg case-law on the concept of "equality of arms" in the context of three different but connected procedural topics: equality between the parties in the institutional framework of criminal proceedings, "equality of arms" principle in the evidentiary proceedings in general and "equality of arms" under Article 6 of the Convention in the jurisprudence concerning criminal trials involving anonymous witnesses. Subsequent chapters of the paper survey the application of this notion to different models of criminal procedure, namely to the common law system (of which England is a good example) and to the model of procedure adopted in the countries of Continental Europe (e.g. Germany and Poland). The analysis does not provide for a comprehensive treatment of all national regulations concerning the issue of equality between the parties in a criminal process. Its objective is rather to emphasise the general approach to the principle of "equality of arms" in different models of criminal justice. The final chapter of the paper focuses on the issue of the possible convergence of different models of criminal procedure adopted in Europe with the one model based on the standards and principles emerged form the jurisprudence of the organs of the Convention.