The Beijing Rules gain further legitimacy as Article 40 of the CRC transforms some of the
principles contained in the rules into binding obligations for states139. It should be noted however
that the Beijing Rules, though useful, contained a fundamental flaw, in that it only set out
protection for persons defined as juveniles under Rule 2.2 (a).140 A juvenile was defined as “a
child or young person who under the respective legal system may be dealt with for an offence in
a manner different from an adult”.141 The age and vulnerability of the child is not the decisive
factor under the rules, but the manner of treatment. This left the definition of juvenile up to the
system of trial in individual countries, thereby limiting the application of the rules.142 By virtue
of this its application should be limited to aiding in the interpretation of the CRC.
The Beijing Rules are concerned with the procedural aspects of youth justice and set out
minimum judicial guarantees. The Beijing Rules reference procedures for the investigation and
p &